PROTECTION  AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF 
LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN 


HEARINGS 


BEFORE  THE 


COMMITTEE  ON 
IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES 


SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGRESS 
SECOND  SESSION 

ON 

H.  R.  11449 

By  Mr.  SWING 


PART  1 


JUNE  15,  16,  21,  1922 


WASHINGTON- 
GOVERNMENT  PRINTING   OFFICE 
WO  1922 


COMMITTEE  ON  IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS. 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES. 
SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGRESS,  SECOND  SESSION. 

MOSES  P.  KINKAID,  Nebraska,  Chairman. 

NICHOLAS  J.  SINNOTT,  Oregon.  CARL  HAYDEN,  Arizona. 

EDWARD  C.  LITTLE,  Kansas.  C.  B.  HUDSPETH,  Texas. 

ADDISON  T.  SMITH,  Idaho.  JOHN  E.  RAKER,  California. 

JOHN  W.  SUMMERS,  Washington.  HOMER  L.  LYON,  North  Carolina. 

HENRY  E.  BARBOUR,  California.  WILLIAM  B.  BANKHEAD,  Alabama. 

E>  O.  LEATHERWOOD,  Utah. 
WILLIAM  WILLIAMSON,  South  Dakota. 
SAMUEL  S.  ARENTZ,  Nevada. 
MANUEL  HERRICK,  Oklahoma. 

A.  R.  HUMPHREY,  Cleric. 


PROTECTION  AM)  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER 

BASIN. 


COMMITTEE  ox  IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS, 

HOUSE  or  REPRESENTATIVES, 
Thursday.  June  15. 

The  committee  met  at  10.30  o'clock  a.  m..  Hon.  Moses  P.  Kinkaid  (chairman) 
presiding. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  committee  will  be  in  order.  This  hearing  has  been  called  for 
the  purpose  of  hearing  those  who  are  interested  in  the  problems  of  the  Imperial 
Valley  and  vicinity  with  respect  to  irrigation  from  the  Colorado  River.  Mr.  Swing, 
\ve  will  say  that  we  have  a  report  on  the  Swing  bill,  just  received  a  few  minutes  ago 
from  Hon."  Albert  B.  Fall.  Secretary  of  the  Interior.  I  am  going  to  leave  it  to  you 
to  outline  the  program  this  morning.  Do  you  wish  to  read  that  report? 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  My  suggestion  would  be  that  the  bill  be  printed  at  the  beginning 
of  the  hearing,  followed  by  the  printing  of  the  report,  so  that  members  of  the  com- 
mittee and  the  Congress  may  have  it  for  convenient  reference. 

(The  bill  referred  ^o.  H.  R.  11449,  and  the  report  of  Secretary  Fall  thereon  are  here 
printed  in  full,  as  follows:) 

[H.  R.  11449.  Sixty-seventh  Congress,  second  session.] 
A  BILL  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin. 

Be  it.  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  United  States  of  America 
in  Congress  assembled.  That  for  the  purpose  of  providing  for  the  regulation,  control, 
and  development  of  the  Colorado  River,  an  international,  interstate,  and  navigable 
stream,  in  accordance  with  a  comprehensive  and  unified  plan,  conserving  natural 
resources,  and  aiding  flood  control,  water  supply,  and  power  development,  the  United 
States  hereby  reserves  to  itself  the  exclusive  right  to  construct,  provide,  and  control 
dams,  reservoirs,  or  diversion  works  upon  the  main  trunk  of  said  river  below  the 
mouth  of  the  Green  River. 

SEC.  2.  That,  for  the  purpose  of  regulating  the  lower  Colorado  River  and  controlling 
the  floods  therein,  providing  storage  of  water  for  irrigation,  securing  the  development 
of  electrical  power,  and  providing  homes  for  honorably  discharged  men  and  women  of 
the  United  States  Army,  Navy,  and  Marine  Corps  who  served  therein  during  the  war 
with  Germany,  the  War  with  Spain,  or  in  the  suppression  of  the  insurrection  in  the 
Philippines,  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  hereby  authorized  and  empowered  to 
construct  a  dam  and  incidental  works  for  the  purpose  of  providing  a  reservoir  at  or 
near  Boulder  Canyon  on  said  river,  adequate  for  the  purposes  aforesaid,  and  to  acquire 
by  proceedings  in  eminent  domain  or  otherwise  all  lands  and  rights  of  way  necessary 
for  the  said  reservoir  and  incidental  works:  also  to  construct  a  main  canal  and  appur- 
tenant structures  located  entirely  within  the  United  States,  connecting  the  Laguna 
Dam  on  said  river  with  the  Imperial  and  Coachella  Valleys,  in  California,  together 
with  such  other  canals  and  structures  as  may  be  required  for  the  distribution  and 
delivery  of  water  from  said  reservoir  and  said  river  to  lands  in  the  United  States 
which  said  Secretary  may  find  practicable  of  irrigation  and  reclamation  therefrom, 
and  to  acquire  by  proceedings  in  eminent  domain  or  otherwise  all  rights  of  way  neces- 
sary for  such  canals  and  structures.  No  expenditures  for  the  construction  of  canals 
or  appurtenant  structures  authorized  hereunder  shall  be  made  until  the  lands  to  be 
irrigated  thereby  shall  have  first  been  legally  obligated  to  repay  their  proper  portions, 
as  may  be  determined  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  of  the  total  costs  thereof  to 
the  United  States  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  repayment  prescribed  in  the  act 
of  Congress  approved  June  17,  1902,  entitled  "An  act  appropriating  the  receipts  from 
the  sale  and  disposal  of  public  lands  in  certain  States  and  Territories  to  the  construc- 
tion of  irrigation  works  for  the  reclamation  of  arid  lands, "  and  acts  amendatory  thereof 
\  or  supplementary  thereto,  hereinafter  referred  to  as  the  reclamation  law. 

1 


15 


2  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

SEC.  3.  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  empowered  to  receive  applications 
for  the  right  to  use  for  the  generation  of  electrical  power  portion"  of  the  water  di^chanred 
from  said  reservoir  and  available  for  the  generation  of  electrical  power  at  said  dam, 
and,  after  full  heiring  of  all  concerned,  to  allocate  to  such  applicants  such  portions 
of  auch  power  privileges  as,  in  his  judgment,  may  be  consistent  with  an  equitable 
distribution  thereof  among  the  various  interested  States  and  among  the  various 
interested  communities  in  each  State.  The  .f.d'I  Secretary,  in  making  such  allocation,  I 
may  give  consideration  to  the  plans  of  the  various  applicants,  having  regard  to  their  N 
relative  adaptability  to  utilize  such  power  privileges  in  the  public  interest,  and  at 
reasonable  cost  to  the  communities  served:  Provided,  That  subject  to  such  allocations 
he  shall  give  preference  to  applications  made  by  political  subdivisions. 

SEC.  4.  That  the  said  Secretary  is  authorized  to  make  leases  of  the  power  privileges 
so  allocated,  limited  to  fifty  years,  on  such  terms  and  under  such  regulations  as  he 
may  prescribe,  and  to  fix  what  he  may  find  to  be  a  reasonable  compensation  therefor. 
Upon  or  after  the  expiration  of  any  such  lease,  or  renewal  thereof,  the  United  States 
may  take  over  the  property  of  the  lessee  which  is  dependent  for  its  usefulness  upon 
the  continuation  of  the  lease,  and  if  it  shall  do  so  shall  pay  to  the  lessee  its  net  invest- 
ment in  the  property  taken,  not  exceeding  the  fair  value  thereof  at  the  time  it  is  so 
taken,  with  reasonable  severance  damages  to  property  of  the  lessee  not  taken.  Such 
net  investment,  or  fair  value  and  damages,  if  not  agreed  upon,  shall  be  fixed  by  a 
proceeding  in  equity  in  the  district  court  of  the  United  States  in  the  district  in  which 
such  property,  or  some  part  thereof,  is  situated.  If  the  United  States  does  not  exer- 
cise its  right  to  take  over  such  property,  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  may,  by  agree- 
ment with  the  lessee,  renew  the  said  lease  for  not  more  than  fifty  years,  or  in  his 
discretion  may  make  a  lease  under  the  terms  hereof  to  a  new  lessee,  upon  the  condition 
that  such  new  lessee  shall  pay  to  the  former  lessee  such  net  investment  and  damages 
determined  as  aforesaid.  If  such  property  is  not  taken  over  by  the  United  States, 
or  such  new  lessee,  or  such  lease  renewed,  the  said  Secretary  shall  extend  such  lease 
from  year  to  year  until  such  property  is  so  taken  over  or  such  lease  renewed. 

SEC.  5.  That  any  such  political  subdivision,  instead  of  entering  into  a  lease,  may, 
with  the  consent  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  as  the  consideration  for  such  power 
privileges  as  may  be  allocated  to  it  as  above  provided,  pay  to  the  United  States  in 
annual  installments,  during  such  period  not  exceeding  twenty-five  years  as  may  be 
agreed  upon,  a  total  sum  which  shall  bear  the  same  proportion  to  the  cost  of  construct- 
ing such  dam  and  incidental  works  and  acquiring  lands  and  right?  of  way  for  said 
reservoir  and  incidental  works,  as  the  water  allocated  to  such  political  subdivision 
bears  to  all  the  water  available  for  the  generation  of  power  at  said  dam,  together  with 
a  like  proportion  of  the  annual  expense  of  operating  and  maintaining  such  dam  and 
incidental  works  and  interest  at  the  rate  of  5  per  centum  per  annum  on  the  unpaid 
portion  of  such  proportionate  part  of  such  cost.  Any  or  all  of  the  installments  of  such 
proportionate  part  of  such  cost  may  be  paid  in  advance.  The  right  to  use  for  the 
generation  of  electrical  power  the  water  so  allocated,  shall  continue  after  the  comple- 
tion of  the  payment  of  such  proportionate  part  of  such  cost,  so  long  as  such  political 
subdivision  shall  pay  annually  such  proportionate  part  of  such  expense  of  operating 
and  maintaining  such  dam  and  incidental  works.  The  said  Secretary  is  authorized 
on  such  terms  and  under  such  regulations  as  he  may  prescribe  to  make  any  contracts 
which  may  be  necessary  to  carry  into  effect  the  provisions  of  this  section.  The  title 
to  said  dam  and  incidental  Avorks  and  reservoir  site  shall  forever  remain  in  the  United 
States.  Until  the  completion  of  said  dam  and  incidental  works  the  Secretary  of  the 
Interior  is  authorized  to  use  any  money  received  under  this  and  the  preceding  section 
for  the  construction  of  said  dam  and  incidental  works. 

SEC.  6.  That  the  right  to  develop  power  from  the  water  in  any  canal  constructed 
under  this  act,  at  points  along  such  canal,  shall  belong  to  the  districts,  communities, 
and  lands  which  contribute  to  the  construction  costs  of  such  canal  and  appurtenant 
structures,  in  proportion  to  their  contributions:  Proridfd,  That  so  long  as  any  money 
is  owing  to  the  United  States  on  account  of  the  construction  of  said  canals  and  appur- 
tenant structures,  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  shall  control  the  disposition  of  said 
rights  to  develop  power  and  the  net  proceeds  from  any  power  development  in  said 
canals  shall  be  applied  upon  such  construction  charges  and  covered  into  the  Treasury 
of  the  United  States,  and  credited  to  the  various  districts,  communities,  and  lands  in 
accordance  with  their  interests  in  said  canals. 

SEC.  7.  That  no  part  of  the  cost  of  the  construction  of  said  dam  or  incidental  works, 
or  the  acquisition  of  lands  or  rights  of  way  for  said  reservoir,  or  incidental  works. 
shall  be  charged  against  any  lands  to  be  irrigated  therefrom,  but  the  total  cost  of  all  /- 
irrigation  canals  and  appurtenant  structures  which  may  be  constructed  hereunder 
shall  be  charged  equitably  against  such  lands,  in  accordance  with  the  benefits  they 
derive  therefrom  as  mav  be  determined  bv  the  Secretarv  of  the  Interior. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIX.        3 

SEC.  8.  That  the  dam  and  reservoir  provided  for  by  section  2  of  this  act  shall  be 
used,  first,  for  river  regulation  and  flood  control;  second,  for  irrigation;  and  third, 
for  power. 

SEC.  9.  That  nothing  contained  in  this  act  shall  be  construed  as  limiting,  diminish- 
ing, or  in  any  manner  interfering  with  any  vested  rights  of  the  States  above  said 
reservoir,  or  of  the  citizens  of  said  States,  to  the  use,  within  the  Colorado  Eiver  water- 
l  shed,  of  the  waters  of  said  Colorado  River. 

SEC.  10.  That  all  lands  of  the  United  States  found  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior 
to  be  practicable  of  irrigation  and  reclamation  by  the  irrigation  works  authorized  by 
the  terms  of  this  act  shall  be  withdrawn  from  public  entry.  Thereafter  when  such 
works  shall  have  been  so  far  constructed  as  to  permit  the  delivery  of  water  to  any 
portion  of  said  withdrawn  lands  which  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  shall  deem  proper 
to  open  for  entry,  such  portion  of  said  lands  shall  be  opened  to  entry  in  tracts,  vary- 
ing in  size,  but  not  exceeding  one  hundred  and  sixty  acres,  as  may  be  determined 
by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  reclama- 
tion law,  and  any  such  entryman  shall  pay  the  proportionate  share,  as  determined 
by  the  said  Secretary,  of  the  construction  cost  of  the  canal  or  canals  and  appurtenant 
structures,  constructed  for  the  irrigation  and  reclamation  of  said  lands,  as  provided 
for  by  this  act,  such  construction  cost  to  be  paid  in  such  installments,  and  at  such 
times  as  may  be  specified  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  the  said  reclamation  law:  Provided,  That  all  persons  who  have  served 
in  the  United  States  Army,  Navy,  or  Marine  Corps  during  the  war  with  Germany, 
the  war  with  Spain,  or  in  the  suppression  of  the  insurrection  in  the  Philippines, 
and  who  have  been  honorably  separated  or  discharged  therefrom  or  placed  in  the 
Regular  Army  or  Navy  Reserve,  shall  have  the  exclusive  preference  right  for  a  period 
of  three  months  to  enter  said  lands;  and  also,  so  far  as  practicable,  preference  shall 
be  given  to  said  persons  in  all  construction  work  authorized  by  this  act:  Provided, 
That  in  the  event  such  an  entry  shall  be  relinquished  at  any  time  prior  to  actual 
residence  upon  the  land  by  the  entryman  for  not  less  than  one  year,  lands  so  relin- 
quished shall  not  be  subject  to  entry  for  a  period  of  sixty  days  after  the  filing  and 
notation  of  the  relinquishnient  in  the  local  land  office,  and  shall,  after  the  expiration 
of  such  sixty-day  period,  be  subject  to  entry  by  the  first  qualified  applicant. 

SEC.  11.  That  for  the  purpose  of  constructing  said  dam  and  incidental  worVs,  and 
acquiring  lands  and  rights  of  way  for  said  reservoir  and  incidental  works,  and  con- 
structing said  main  canal  from  Laguna  Uam  to  Imperial  and  Coachella  Valleys,  and 
appurtenant  structures  and  acquiring  rights  of  way  therefor,  there  is  hereby  author- 
ized to  be  appropriated,  from  any  moneys  ii:  the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated , 
such  amounts  as  may  be  necessary  to  carry  out  the  purposes  of  this  act,  not  exceeding 
in  the  aggregate  the  sum  of  $70,000,000,  to  be  appropriated  from  time  to  time  upon 
estimates  made  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  and  transferred  to  the  reclamation 
fund  established  under  said  reclamation  law.  All  moneys  received  under  leases  and 
contracts  authorized  by  sections  4  and  5  of  this  act,  in  excess  of  the  expenseof  operating 
and  maintaining  said  dam  and  incidental  works,  and  not  used  for  construction  as  pro- 
vided in  section  5  hereof,  shall  be  covered  into  the  Treasury  of  the  United  Stutes. 
All  moneys  transferred  from  the  General  Treasury  to  the  reclamation  fund,  and  used 
for  the  construction  of  any  canal  or  appurtenant  structures  authorized  under  this  act, 
shall  be  repaid  by  the  districts,  communities,  and  lands  benefited  thereby,  and  the 
Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  hereby  empowered,  after  a  full  hearing  of  all  concerned,  to 
allocate  the  costs  of  any  such  canal  and  appurtenant  structures  among  the  various 
districts,  communities,  and  lands  served  thereby,  according  to  the  benefits  derived 
therefrom. 

SKC.  1'2.  Thai  nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  construed  as  modifying  in  any  manner 
•the  existing  contract.  dat*':i  October 'J:!.  I'.US,  between  the  Unitc'l  States  and  Imperial 
irrigation  district,  providing  for  a  connection  with  Laguna  Dam;  but  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Interior  is  authorized  to  modify  the  said  contract,  with  the  consent  of 
the  said  district,  in  order  to  provide  for  the  construction,  in  accordance  with  the  terms 
of  this  act,  of  a  canal  or  canals  and  appurtenant  structures,  adequate  to  serve  the  lands 
of  said  district,  and  other  lands  that  may  be  served  thereby,  and  to  equitably  allocate 
the  costs  thereof. 

SEC.  13.  That  wherever  the  words  "political  subdivision"  or  "political  subdi- 
visions" are  used  herein  they  shall  be  understood  to  include  any  State,  district. 
municipality,  or  other  governmental  organization. 


4  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVKR    BASIN. 

THE  SECRETARY  OF  THE  INTERIOR. 

Washington,  June  14,  19..' :. 
Hon.  M.  P.  KIMKAID. 

Chairman  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands. 

House  of  Representatives . 

MY  DEAR  MR.  KINKAID:  Reference  is  made  to  your  letter  of  May  3,  1922,  trans- 
mitting copy  of  H.  R.  11449.  "A  bill  to  provide  for  the  protection  and  development  I 
of  the  Lower  Colorado  River  Basin."  with  request  for  report. 

The  Colorado  River  is  an  interstate  and  international  stream,  the  lower  portion  of 
which  is  navigable.  The  proposed  measure  affects  the  entire  stream  system  touching 
the  States  of  Arizona.  California.  Colorado.  Nevada.  New  Mexico.  Utah.  Wyoming, 
and  the  Republic  of  Mexico.  The  mean  annual  discharge  of  the  Colorado  River  at 
Lagima  Dam.  near  Yuma,  Ariz.,  is  16,400,000  acre-feet  of  water,  as  shown  by  meas- 
urements taken  in  the  years  1899  to  1920,  inclusive.  The  problems  arising  from  the 
use  of  this  river  have  been  for  many  years  the  subject  of  much  discussion  and  specula- 
tion. They  relate  principally  to  flood  control,  irrigation,  and  power,  and  involve 
differences  actual  and  potential  between  private  citizens,  between  States  of  this 
Republic,  and  between  the  United  States  and  the  Republic  of  Mexico. 

In  1921  the  States  above  mentioned,  by  acts  of  their  respective  legislatures,  pro- 
vided for  the  appointment  of  commissioners  to  negotiate  an  agreement  between  said 
States  respecting  the  use  of  the  water  of  said  river,  and  by  act  of  August  19,  1921 
(42  Stat.  171),  the  United  States  consented  to  the  making  o"f  such  an  agreement  and 
the  President,  under  said  act.  appointed  Mr.  Herbert  Hoover  to  represent  the  United 
States  in  such  negotiations.  These  several  representatives  have  organized  into  what 
is  known  as  the  Colorado  River  Commission,  have  held  hearings  in  Washington  and 
in  the  West,  but  have  as  yet  reached  no  agreement. 

The  act  of  May  18,  1920  (41  Stat.  600),  authorized  the  Secretary  of  the  Int-rior  to 
have  made  an  examination  and  report  on  possible  irrigation  development  of  lands  in 
southern  California  from  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  River.  A  preliminary  report  under 
this  act  was  made  by  the  Director  of  the  Reclamation  Service  in  1920  and  the«ame 
was  printed  by  your  committee  in  January.  1921.  under  the  title,  "Preliminary  report 
on  problems  of  Imperial  Valley  and  vicinity." 

Under  the  authority  of  said  act  of  May  18,  1920,  the  preliminary  report  referred  to 
has  been  followed  by  a  more  detailed  report  made  by  the  Director  of  the  Reclamation 
Service  in  January,  1922.  This  later  report  is  now  being  printed  as  Senate  Docu- 
ment No.  143  under  the  title,  "Report  on  problems  of  Imperial  Valley  and  vicinity." 

In  the  report  last  named,  the  following  recommendations  are  made  relative  to  the 
use  of  the  Colorado  River,  to  wit: 

1.  It  is  recommended  that  through  suitable  legislation  the  United  States  undertake 
the  construction  with  Government  funds  of  a  high  line  canal  from  Laguna  Dam  to 
the  Imperial  Valley,  to  be  reimbursed  by  the  lands  benefited. 

2.  It  is  recommended  that  the  public  lands  that  can  be  reclaimed  by  such  works 
be  reserved  for  settlement  by  ex-service  men  under  conditions  securing  actual  settle- 
ment and  cultivation. 

3.  It  is  recommended  that  through  suitable  legislation  the  United  States  undertake 
the  construction  with  Government  funds  of  a  r?s  Tvoir  at  or  n<?ar  Boulder  Canyon,  on 
the  lower  Colorado  River,  to  be  reimbursed  by  the  revenues  from  leasing  the  power 
privileges  incident  thereto. 

4.  It  is  recommended  that  any  State  interested  in  this  development  shall  have  the 
right  at  its  election  to  contribute  an  equitable  part  of  the  cost  of  the  construction  of 
the  reservoir  and  receive  for  its  contribution  a  proportionate  share  of  power  at  cost 
to  be  determined  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior. 

5.  It  is  recommended  that  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  be  empowered ,  after  full  ' 
hearing  of  all  concerned,  to  allow  the  various  applicants  their  due  proportion  of  the 
power  privileges  and  to  allocate  the  cost  and  benefits  of  a  high  line  canal. 

6.  It  is  recommended  that  every  development  hereafter  authorized  to  be  under- 
taken on  the  Colorado  River,  by  Federal  Government  or  otherwise,  be  required  in 
both  construction  and  operation  to  give  priority  of  right  and  use:  (1  ^  To  river  regu- 
lat,ion  and  flood  control:  (2>  to  use  of  storage  water  for  irrigation    (3)  to  development 
of  power. 

The  high  line  canal  from  Laguna  Dam  to  the  Imperial  Valley,  referred  to  above  in 
recommendation  Xo.  1 .  is  the  subject  of  a  separate  report  made  in  1919  by  a  board 
consisting  of  Messrs.  Elwood  Mead.  W.  W.  Schlecht.  and  C.  E.  Grunsky.    This  report 
is  published  under  the  title.  "The  All-American  Canal."  and  a  copy  of  same  is  in-  /" 
closed  for  your  information. 

H.  R.  H449  seemingly  is  intended  to  give  legislative  expression  to  a  considerable 
extent  to  the  above-mentioned  recommendations  of  the  report  on  problems  of  Imperial 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX.  5 

Valley  and  vicinity,  which  recommendations  I  have  heretofore  approved.  The  bill 
would  provide  for  a  total  appropriation  from  the  General  Treasury  of  $70.000,000. 
Apparently  it  would  be  the  plan  to  utilize  about  $48,000.000  for  the  building  of  a 
dam  and  incidental  works  at  or  near  Boulder  Canyon,  and  the  remainder  for  construc- 
tion work  upom  the  All-American  Canal  from  Laguna  Dam. 

It  is  roughly  estimated  that  for  $48,000.000  there  could  be  constructed  at  or  near 
Boulder  Canyon,  a  dam  600  feet  in  height  having  a  capacity  of  about  24. 000, 000  acre- 
feet.  The  upper  5.000.000  acre-feet  of  this  capacity  could  be  utilized  principally 
for  flood  control,  and  incidentally  for  irrigation  and  power,  14,000.000  acre-feet  of 
the  capacity  could  be  utilized  primarily  for  irrigation  and  power  with  preference 
for  the  former,  while  the  lower  5.000.000  acre-feet  would  be  required  for  the  storage 
of  silt.  Such  a  reservoir  would  develop  about  700.000  firm  turbine  horsepower,  on 
the  assumption  of  the  irrigation  of  a  total  area  of  2.000.000  acres  of  land  above  the 
reservoir,  and  a  total  area  of  1.500.000  acres  below  the  reservoir.  The  bill  proposes 
that  the  cost  of  this  reservoir  be  not  charged  against  any  of  the  land  to  be  irrigated 
with  its  waters,  but  that  such  cost  be  returned  from  the  sale  of  the  right  to  use  the 
water  of  the  reservoir  for  the  generation  of  the  electrical  power. 

The  proposed  reservoir  would  be  of  great  importance  in  controlling  the  destructive 
floods  of  the  lower  Colorado.  Through  the  deposit  of  silt  the  river  has  for  years  been 
gradually  building  up  a  great  delta  cone  across  the  head  of  the  Gulf  of  California,  and 
back  of  this  cone  it  has  been  gradually  elevating  its  channel.  As  a  result,  in  periods 
of  high  water  it  breaks  its  low  and  unstable  banks,  overflowing  the  surrounding  country 
and  producing  great  loss  of  property.  These  floods  are  a  particular  menace  to  large 
developments  in  and  about  Yuma,  Ariz.,  and  in  the  Imperial  Valley  in  California. 
They  have  been  guarded  against  to  a  certain  extent  by  the  construction  of  expensive 
levees,  which,  however,  afford  a  most  inadequate  protection.  A  large  reservoir  in 
the  vicinity  of  Boulder  Canyon  could  be  so  used  as  substantially  to  eliminate  the  flood 
menace  of  the  Colorado  River,  but  in  order  to  secure  complete  protection  it  would  be 
necessary  to  take  further  precautions  against  the  floods  from  the  Gila  River,  which 
joins  the  Colorado  a  short  distance  above  Yuma.  However,  the  floods  in  the  latter 
are  of  short  duration  and  of  relatively  small  total  volume,  and  as  a  rule  occur  in  winter 
and  do  not  coincide  with  those  on  the  main  Colorado. 

The  suggested  reservoir  at  or  near  Boulder  Canyon  would  provide  a  water  supply 
for  the  irrigation  of  large  areas  of  fertile  land  in  the  lower  Colorado  Basin  that  can  not 
be  developed  without  the  storage  of  water-.  The  area  of  new  lands  in  California  and 
Ari/onia  feasible  of  irrigation  under  such  a  reservoir  is  roughly  estimated  at  700,000 
acres,  while  in  addition  a  more  stable  and  certain  water  supply  could  be  provided  for 
520,000  acres  heretofore  irrigated. 

The  generation  of  electrical  power  at  the  proposed  reservoir  would  have  an  important 
relation  to  the  conservation  of  the  oil  and  coal  supply  of  the  Nation. 

The  cost  of  the  main  All-American  Canal,  including  connections  at  Laguna  Dam,  is 
estimated  at  $30,000,000.  The  515,000  acres  in  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  and  the 
432,000  acres  of  new  lands  above  referred  to  could  all  be  served  with  irrigation  water 
from  this  canal.  At  the  present  time  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  is  dependent  for 
a  water  supply  upon  a  very  uncertain  and  unsatisfactory  diversion  at  Hanlon  Heading 
and  conveyance  through  a  canal  on  Mexican  soil.  The  substantial  difficulties  arising 
from  this  situation  would  be  obviated  by  the  construction  of  the  All-American  Canal. 

Of  the  lands  irrigable  from  the  developments  proposed  by  H.  R.  11449,  166,900 
irrigable  acres  are  public  lands  in  California,  and  these  would  be  opened  to  entry 
with  preference  rights  to  former  soldiers . 

The  text  of  the  contract  of  October  23,  1918.  between  the  United  States  and  the 
Imperial  irrigation  district  referred  to  in  section  12  of  the  bill  appears  on  pages  67  to 
71,  inclusive,  of  the  copy  of  report  on  "The  All-American  Canal"  transmitted  here- 
with. No  actual  construction  work  has  been  done  by  the  district  under  this  con- 
tract, but  the  sum  of  $96.000  has  been  paid  by  the  district  to  the  United  States  to 
apply  upon  the  total  obligation  of  $1.600.000"  incurred  under  the  contract  for  the 
right  to  connect  with  and  use  Laguna  Dam. 

I  am  in  general  agreement  with  the  provisions  of  the  bill,  but  there  are  other  con- 
siderations which  have  impressed  themselves  upon  me  and  which  I  think  justify  the 
suggestion  of  the  following  amendments: 

Page  10,  line  12.  insert  after  the  word  "district":  "Or  to  enter  into  a  new  contract 
or  contracts  with  the  said  district,  or  any  private  corporation,  or  any  corporation 
subsidiary  to  such  district.  " 

Page  10.  line  16.  insert  after  the  word  "thereof"  and  before  the  period:  ••  l'mri<l<'<l. 
That  nothing  in  this  section  shall  be  construed  to  limit  the  authority  of  the  Secretary 
of  the  Interior  to  enter  into  other  contracts  for  the  disposition  of  waters  of  the  Rio 
Colorado  where  such  contracts  are  not  in  conflict  with  the  terms  of  this  act  or  in  abro- 
gation of  contracts  already  entered  into,  nor  with  the  laws  or  treaties  of  the  United 
States,  or  with  the  rights  of  any  State.  " 


6  DKYKI.ol'.MKXT    OF   LOWER   COLORADO    RIVER    BASIN. 

• 

It  is  rather  a  delicate  matter  to  refer  to  foreign  relations  in  a  report  of  this  character. 
However,  it  is  a  well  known  fact  that  the  Colorado  is  an  international  stream.  Should 
it  (,(•  possible  '"  enter  inio  a  contract  directly  with  a  company  or  corporation  organized 
or  doing  i. urines.-  under  the  laws  of  Mexico,  and  should  such  contract  entered  into 
by  such  Mexican  corporation  or  individuals  operating  in  Mexico  receive  the  ap- 
proval of  the  then  authorities  of  Mexico,  claims  for  damage  or  any  complaint  as  to 
injury  arising  from  the  supposed  ignoring  of  treaty  obligations  would  be  avoided. 
Such'  result  may  possibly  be  brought  about  without  diplomatic  negotiations  or  com- 
plications should  the  amendments  proposed  be  inserted  in  the  bill. 

The  last  amendment  is  intended  to  refer  particularly  to  the  use  of  waters  under 
the  Yuma  project,  where  the  same  are  being  conducted  through  the  canals  of  said 
project  and  the  excess  over  our  day  to  day  use  discharged  at  the  ends  of  such  canals. 
Such  discharged  waters  may  be  contracted  to  be  used  as  a  day  to  day  license,  to  be 
used  by  parties  within  the  United  States  who  may  take  the  same  as  a  day  to  day 
license  and  apply  the  waters  to  beneficial  use  beyond  the  borders  of  the  United 
States. 

With  much  diffidence  and  hesitation,  as  I  do  not  deem  it  my  duty  nor  within  my 
proper  authority  to  suggest  legislation  to  Congress.  I  am  handing  you  herewith  a 
draft  of  two  sections  which  might  be  considered  by  the  committee  as  a  substitute 
for  section  11  of  the  bill.  These  sections,  as  suggested,  are  as  follows: 

SKC.  11.  That  for  the  purpose  of  constructing  said  dam  and  incidental  works, 
together  with  the  machinery  necessary  for  generating  the  power  to  be  developed 
thereby,  and  of  acquiring  lands  and  right  of  way  for  said  reservoir  and  dam  and  inci- 
dental works  there  is  hereby  authorized  to  be  appropriated  the  sum  of  $ —  — ,  to  be 
paid  from  time  to  time  upon  requisition  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  by  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury. 

• '  The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  hereby  authorized  and  directed  to  issue  fifty-year 
bonds  of  the  United  States,  in  the  sum  of  $ — - — • — ,  in  series,  and  to  cause  to  be  sold 
the  same  from  time  to  time  as  needed,  the  proceeds  of  such  sales  to  be  deposited  for 
such  dam,  reservoir,  and  power  purposes.  Such  bonds  shall  bear  interest  at  the 
rate  of  —  per  cent,  payable  semiannually  and  redeemable  after  thirty  years,  in  the 
order  of  the  series  issue'd  thereof. 

"The  Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  hereby  authorized  and  directed  to  enter  into 
contracts  for  the  sale  or  lease  of  the  hydroelectric  power  to  be  developed  through  the 
construction  and  use  of  such  dam  and  machinery,  at.such  charges,  by  sales,  leases,  or 
rentals,  as  will  produce  revenues  sufficient  to  meet  the  semiannual  interest  upon 
such  bonds,  and  to  provide  a  sinking  fund  for  the  redemption  of  such  bonds.  Such 
contract  for  sales,  leases,  rentals,  shall  be  under  the  terms  of  this  section  and  in  accord 
with  the  provisions  of  sections  4  and  5  of  this  bill  as  construed  together.  The  Secre- 
tary of  the  Interior  may  assist  in  the  sale  of  such  bonds  and  the  provision  for  the  pay- 
ment of  interest  thereupon  by  entering  into  negotiations  prior  to  the  completion  of 
such  dam  with  parties  or  municipal  or  political  corporations  for  the  allocation  of 
stated  amounts  of  power  to  such  parties  or  corporations,  upon  the  payment  of  a  bonus 
over  and  above  the  par  value  of  such  bonds,  in  consideration  of  such  prior  rights  of 
allocation,  and  the  results  of  such  negotiations  shall  be  communicated  to  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  for  his  final  action  and  approval  in  the  delivery  of  the  bonds. 

"SEC.  12.  That  there.is  hereby  authorized  to  be  appropriated  from  any  moneys  in 
the  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated  such  amounts  as  may  be  necessary  to  carry 
out  the  purposes  of  this  act  in  the  construction  of  said  main  canals  or  other  canalt 
from  the  Laguna  Dam  to  the  public  lands  which  may  be  irrigated,  and  to  the  Imperial 
and  Coachella  Valleys,  with  appurtenant  structures  and  for  the  purpose  of  acquiring 
rights  of  way,  etc..  the  sum  of  $ —  — ,  to  be  made  available  from  time  to  time,  upon 
estimates  made  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  such  amounts  to  be  paid  out  of  the 
fund  designated  as  the  reclamation  fund  heretofore  established  under  the  reclamation 
law  of  1902.  All  moneys  received  under  leases  and  contracts  for  the  sale  of  water 
rights,  the  delivery  of  water,  together  with  repayments  of  construction  charges  agreed 
to  bft  made  by  the  present  users  of  water  in  the  Imperial  Valley,  Coachella  Valley, 
and  others,  shall  be  paid  into  the  credit  of  the  general  reclamation  fund.  The  cost  of 
operating  and  maintaining  such  canals  and  works  and  the  delivery  of  such  water 
under  contract  or  otherwise  shall  be  collected  under  the  terms  of  the  general  reclama- 
tion act  and  amendments  thereto.  Any  moneys  transferred  from  the  General  Treasury 
to  the  reclamation  fund  for  purposes  herein  set  forth  and  used  for  the  construction  of 
any  canal  or  appurtenant  structures  authorized  under  this  act  shall  be  repaid  by  the 
districts,  communities,  and  lands  benefited  thereby,  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior 
is  hereby  empowered,  after  a  hearing  of  all  concerned  to  allocate  the  costs  of  any 
such  canal  and  the  appurtenant,  structures  among  the  various  districts,  communities, 
and  lands  served  thereby,  according  to  the  benefits  derived  therefrom." 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  7 

(Renumber  section  ]2  of  the  bill  as  No.  13,  and  No.  13  as  section  14.) 

I  think  that  from  the  report  as  hereinbefore  first  set  forth  it  must  be  apparent  that 
sufficient  sums  can  be  recovered  from  the  sale  of  power  at  the  dam  to  finance  the 
construction  by  amortization,  as  suggested,  of  amounts  to  be  derived  from  the  sale 
of  Government  bonds,  without  imposing  any  further  burden  upon  the  taxpayers  of 
the  United  States  and  yet  in  line  with  good  and  sound  finance. 

Also,  1  would  suggest  that  the  apparent  intent  of  the  bill  would  be  better  expressed 
if  in  line  10  on  page  5  the  word  "proportion"  were  replaced  by  the  word  "ratio," 
and  in  line  15  on  the  same  page  the  word  "proportion"  were  replaced  by  the  words 
"proportionate  part." 

I  find  myself  able  to  approve  the  adoption  of  this  proposed  legislation  with  the 
direct  amendments  suggested  and  with  or  without  the  substitution  of  the  proposed 
financial  sections  for  section  11  of  the  bill  as  it  lies  before  me. 
Very  respectfully, 

ALBERT  B.  FALL, 

Secretary  of  the  Interior. 

STATEMENT   OF  HON.   PHILIP   D.    SWING,   MEMBER  OF   CONGRESS 

FROM  CALIFORNIA. 

Mr.  SWING.  The  report  of  the  Interior  Department  is  favorable  to  the  general  pro- 
gram outlined  in  my  bill.  The  principal  modification  which  the  Secretary  offers  is 
that  instead  of  an  authorization  of  an- appropriation  of  money  direct  from  the  Treas- 
ury a  bond  issue  be  authorized  to  cover  the  cost  of  this  particular  project  and  that 
the  principal  and  interest  be  paid  out  of  the  revenues  to  be  derived  from  the  project. 

This  matter  has  been  before  your  committee  heretofore.  In  1919  I  had  the  honor 
of  appearing  here  with  a  delegation  representing  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  and 
presenting  to  you  what  appeared  to  us  to  be  a  very  serious  situation  on  the  lower 
Colorado  River,  meriting  the  attention  of  the  Federal  Government. 

I  think  that  this  committee  was  impressed  with  the  importance  and  seriousness  of 
the  problem  and  felt  that  it  was  a  matter  of  which  the  Federal  Government  should 
take  cognizance,  because  following  our  representations  it  reported  a  bill  which  was 
passed  by  Congress  authorizing  an  investigation  by  governmental  officials,  with 
instructions  to  them  to  report  to  Congress  what  ought  to  be  done  in  the  matter. 

This  investigation  has  now  been  made,  and  the  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Inte- 
rior covering  the  same,  together  with  his  recommendations,  is  now  before  you.  The 
report  is  based  upon  an  exhaustive  study  of  the  problems  of  the  Colorado  River  made 
by  Director  Davis,  of  the  Reclamation  Service,  ably  assisted  by  a  board  of  eminent 
engineers,  who  cooperated  with  him  in  his  investigations  and  advised  with  him  in 
the  conclusions  reached . 

We  are  here  to-day  to  say  that  we  accept  the  report  and  recommendations  that  have 
been  made  to  you  by  these  Government  officials,  and  are  ready  to  cooperate  in  carrying 
them  into  effect.  We  believe  that  if  these  recommendations  are  followed  out  it  will 
result  in  a  proper  solution  of  the  problems  of  the  Imperial  Valley  and  of  the  lower 
Colorado  River.  We  go  further;  we  believe  the  recommendations  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior  offer  the  only  solution  of  the  problem  now  confronting  us. 

As  I  stated  to  you  when  I  was  here  before,  the  Imperial  Valley  is  menaced  by  three 
factors,  one  of  which  is  the  Mexican  international  complication;  another  of  which  is  the 
interstate  complication  with  the  Government  project  in  the  Yuma  Valley,  Ariz.; 
and  the  third  is  with  the  forces  of  the  river  itself  in  flood  times. 

The  difficulty  of  operating  this,  the  largest  single  irrigated  unit  in  the  United  States, 
is  clearly  shown  when  we  look  at  the  map,  where  it  is  seen  that  about  60  miles  of  the 
main  canal  of  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  nins  through  Mexico.  When  the  water 
is  taken  across  the  line  into  Mexico  in  order  to  skirt  a  low  range  of  sand  hills  which 
separates  Imperial  Valley  from  the  river,  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  loses  all  con- 
trol over  that  water,  both  physical  and  legal,  and  thereafter  it  is  controlled  by  aMexican 
corporation  until  it  is  finally  returned  to  the  American  side — i.  e.,  the  part  of  the  water 
which  is  not  used  inMexico.  At  the  present  time  the  stock  of  that  Mexican  corporation 
is  held  by  the  Imperial  irrigation  district,  but  I  will  discuss  that  point  a  little  later. 

The  problem  of  as  big  and  complicated  a  business  as  this,  doing  business  under  two 
flags,  is  almost  self-evident.  We  maintain  a  fleet  of  9  or  10  dredges  in  the  main  canal. 
All  of  the  red  tape  of  the  customhouses  has  to  be  gone  through  every  time  one  of  these 
crosses  the  international  boundary  line.  We  have  to  put  labor  over  there,  replacing 
those  who  quit;  all  the  complications  created  by  the  immigration  laws  of  two  nations 
have  to  be  complied  with  every  time  a  laborer  goes  across. 

The  same  is  true  of  getting  supplies  across  as  well  as  the  necessary  material  to  repair, 
improve,  and  maintain  not  only  the  canals  but  also  the  flood  levee  systems.  The 


8        DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BABIX. 

interminable  delays  are  not  only  costly  but  at  times  make  operation  well-nigh  im- 
possible. Then  there  is  the  payment  of  money  in  various  forms  to  the  Mexican 
Government,  called  taxes.  They  have  as  many  different  kinds  over  there  as  we  have, 
and  a  few  besides,  all  of  which  are  patterned  on" the  principle  of  all  the  traffic  will  bear. 
There  are  import  duties  and  export  duties.  There  is  the  poll  tax  on  the  employees 
and  another  on  the  mules  and  horses:  of  course,  there  is  one  on  the  supplies  which"  the 
men,  mules,  and  horses  eat.  There  is  a  tax  on  the  water  sold.  Finally  there  are  (  I 
special  assessments  of  various  kinds — some  payable  in  money  and  some  payable  in  ^«— 
work,  such  as  road  construction,  bridge  buildinsr.  and  the  like.  They  even  charge  us 
an  import  duty  on  the  material  that  goes  into  the  levees  by  which  their  o  .vn  live-  and 
property  are  protected,  and  then  discount  our  money  when  we  go  to  pay  their  taxes 
and  charges. 

That  country,  as  you  all  know,  particularly  those  of  you  from  near  the  border,  is 
subject  to  sudden  uprisings  of  various  kinds,  and  it  would  be  a  golden  opportunity 
for  a  band  of  insurrectos  who  were  striving  to  either  oust  the  present  governing  force 
which  is  at  Mexicala,  the  capital  of  that  district,  or  who  were  trying,  like  Villa,  when 
he  attacked  Columbus  to  force  the  intervention  of  the  United  States,  to  destroy  with 
a  stick  of  dynamite  the  canal  or  some  of  its  principal  works,  thereby  cutting  off  not 
only  the  Mexican  capital  but  also  the  Imperial  Valley  from  all  water,  including 
domestic  water. 

As  you  know,  the  Imperial  Valley  is  noted  for  its  aridity  rain  fall,  varying  from  1  to 
6  inches— not  enough,  of  course,  to  produce  any  crops.  There  are  no  wells  except 
about  a  dozen  in  one  narrow  section  of  the  country  and  in  most,  if  not  all,  of  these  the 
water  is  salty  and  warm.  So  the  people  of  Imperial  Valley  are  absolutely  dependent 
for  their  water  upon  that  coming  from  the  Colorado  River  and  their  ability  to  get  this 
depends  upon  the  good  will  of  the  citizens  of  a  foreign  country  principally  noted  for 
its  lack  of  good  will  toward  us. 

In  addition  to  that  the  country  through  which  this  canal  runs  is  subject  to  cultiva- 
tion, and  about  190,000  acres  of  it  is  under  cultivation  now,  and  a  good  deal  more  of  it 
is  capable  of  being  brought  under  cultivation  with  some  slight  changes  in  the  physical 
situation  down  there.  One  syndicate  alone  owns  800,000  acres.  This  land  has  the 
legal  right  to  take  half  the  water  in  the  canal  and  the  physical  power  to  take  it  all. 

When  I  say  that  we  have  had  in  the  Imperial  Valley  year  after  year  water  shortages, 
some  of  which  have  cost  the  valley  in  loss  of  crops  as  high  as  $5,000,000  or  $6,000,000 
in  one  year,  and  that  the  Mexican  lands  have  never  known  a  water  shortage,  you  see 
the  position  of  advantage  they  are  in  and  the  position  of  disadvantage  we  are  in. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  What  is  the  source  of  the  Colorado  River,  Mr.  Swing;  does  it  origi- 
nate in  Mexico  or  in  this  country? 

Mr.  SWING.  It  originates  entirely  in  this  country — none  of  it  originates  in  Mexico. 
We  divert  our  water  from  the  river  on  the  American  side  of  the  line,  about  a  mile  and 
a  half  from  the  international  boundary  line;  and  then  the  canal  system  as  originally 
laid  out  years  ago,  following  the  line  of  least  resistance,  crosses  the  international 
boundary  line  and  for  about  60  miles  is  in  Mexico  and  finally  comes  back  into  the 
United  States  again  near  Calexico,  Calif. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  You  divert  it  before  it  reaches  Mexico? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes.  An  engineering  survey  in  which  the  Government  participated 
has  laid  out  an  all- American  canal  route,  and  its  construction  is  recommended  in  the 
Secretary's  report  and  is  authorized  in  this  bill.  The  present  situation  from  the 
standpoint  of  operation  is  one  of  confusion,  of  chaos,  and  of  utter  impossibility  of 
carrying  on  this  great  business  which  spends  on  an  average  of  $2,000,000  a  year,  as  can 
be  seen. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  I  do  not  know  whether  I  fully  understand  you,  Mr.  Swing,  when 
you  stated  that  the  Mexicans  had  never  known  a  water  shortage  but  that  the  Imperial 
Valley  in  this  country  had.  If  you  take  the  water  out  before  it  reaches  Mexico,  win- 
is  it  that  this  country  has  suffered  a  shortage  of  water  and  Mexico  has  not? 

Mr.  SWING.  Over  on  the  map  [referring  to  map  on  the  committee  room  wall],  Mr. 
Hudspeth,  you  see  that  narrow  dark  line  representing  the  canal  that  comes  out  of  the 
river  just  above  the  international  boundary  line  in  the  United  States,  and  then  goes 
across  the  boundary  and  back  again  in  a  big  loop.  There  is  ctiltivated  land  in  Mexico 
all  along  that  canal,  and  they  have  put  in  diversions  in  this  canal  wherever  and 
whenever  they  wanted  to  do  so  and  take  as  much  water  as  they  wanted.  The  com- 
pany which  owns  and  operates  this  canal  in  Mexico  is  a  Mexican  company,  of  which 
the  Imperial  irrigation  district  at  the  present  time  is  holding  the  stock,  and  in  that 
way  controlling  this  Mexican  company,  subject  to  the  laws,  rules,  and  regulations  of  ^ 
Mexico,  and  this  is  the  point  I  want  to  get  at  now:  The  charter  or  concession  of  this  f 
Mexican  company  from  the  Mexican  Government  expressly  provides  that  no  foreign 
State  or  government  shall  ever  own  the  stock  of  this  company,  nor  shall  any  foreign 
government  ever  make  any  representations  to  Mexico  regarding  this  company  or  its 
business. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN.  9 

When  this  original  company,  which  laid  this  system  out,  went  bankrupt  and  the 
farmers  and  the  settlers  in  the  imperial  Valley  organized  a  district  and  bid  it  in.  paying 
$3,000,000  for  what  was  there  on  the  ground,  both  in  the  United  States  and  Mexico, 
they  inherited  this  dual  system  of  one  company  in  Mexico  and  another  in  the  United 
States,  and — it  being  the  only  thing  they  coul'd  do — they  took  over  the  stock  of  this 
Mexican  company  and  now  hold  it  in  order  to  effect  some  kind  of  harmony  of  operation. 
Any  day,  my  belief  is  that  Mexico  could  raise  the  question  that  this  Mexican  company 
is  violating  its  charter  and  could  declare  its  concession  forfeited,  and  then  you  would 
have  a  situation  like  two  mules  on  a  team,  one  of  them  going  in  one  direction  and  the 
other  going  in  another  direction,  without  any  control  over  the  situation  at  all. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  Is  this  Mexican  canal  company  different  from  the  Mexicao  land 
company? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes.  This  Mexican  canal  company  owns  no  land  except  the  rights  of 
way  and  is  not  engaged  in  any  land  cultivation  at  all. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  The  company  that  you  referred  to  a  few  moments  ago  as  having  a 
charter  from  the  Mexican  Government  containing  these  provisions  you — 

Mr.  SWING  (interposing).  It  is  simply  an  operating  company  in  Mexico,  but  the 
Mexican  Government  controls  it. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  Is  it  in  any  way  connected  with  the  land  company? 

Mr.  SWING.  Xo;  that  is  separate.  As  I  have  said,  this  Mexican  company  is  responsi- 
ble to  Mexican  officials  at  Mexico  City.  The  Imperial  irrigation  district  is  responsible 
to  the  State  officials  at  Sacramento.  Calif.  Even  now  it  is  difficult  to  get  the  two 
Governments  to  agree  to  the  same  proposed  improvement.  For  instance,  we  wanted 
to  put  in  a  cut-off  in  Mexico  to  increase  the  grade  of  our  main  canal,  as  was  recom- 
mended to  us  by  our  consulting  engineers.  The  California  State  authorities  approved 
it  but  the  Mexican  authorities  have  never  permitted  us  to  use  it.  Under  the  State 
law  of  California  if  the  district  wants  to  make  any  prominent  improvement,  it  must 
prepare  plans,  send  them  up  to  Sacramento;  the  State  engineer  and  the  bonding 
commission  must  investigate  and  approve  or  disapprove  them;  on  the  other  hand, 
if  the  proposed  work  happens  to  be  in  Mexico,  we  must  also  send  a  duplicate  of  such 
plans  down  to  Mexico  City,  and  they  look  at  it  from  the  Mexican  point  of  view. 

It  is  possible  and  it  has  happened  that  the  American  supervising  power  said,  "This 
is  a  good  thing,  do  it'':  while  the  Mexican  Government  said,  i-This  is  not  a  good  thing; 
it  will  interfere  with  getting  water  out  for  Mexican  lands.  We  disapprove  it." 

So  it  is  almost  an  impossible  situation,  and  points  to  the  necessity  of  getting  our 
irrigation  system  out  of  Mexico. 

Mr.  LINEBERGER.  Mr.  Swing,  is  it  not  also  a  fact  that  according  to  this  concession 
which  the  Mexican  company  has  that  they  actually  control  50  per  cent  of  all  the 
water  that  passes  through  that  canal,  irrespective  of  the  fact  of  whether  they  may 
contribute  to  its  upkeep  or  not? 

Mr.  SWING.  Oh,  yes. 

Mr.  LINEBERGER.  And  by  virtue  of  the  physical  conditions  can  take  the  water 
before  it  gets  into  the  valley? 

Mr.  SWING.  They  control  it  all.  The  concession  reads  somewhat  to  this  affect — 
a  full  copy  of  the  concession  is  set  out  in  the  hearings  before  this  committee  in  1919 — 
one  half  of  the  water  which  this  company  secures,  whether  diverted  in  the  United 
States  or  in  Mexico,  must  on  demand  of  Mexican  lands  be  supplied  to  Mexican  lands; 
the  other  half  may  be  disposed  of  elsewhere.  There  is  no  obligation  to  return  any  of 
it  to  the  United  States. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  The  Imperial  Valley  at  the  present  time  gets  its  water  from 
this  canal  after  it  goes  through  Mexican  territory? 

Mr.  S  \VING.  Yes;  all  of  it. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  And  under  the  propositions  contained  in  your  bill,  if  the 
Boulder  Dam  be  constructed  there  would  be  a  new  canal  to  the  Imperial  Valley, 
no  part  of  which  canal  would  be  in  Mexican  territory? 

Mr.  SWING.  That  is  it  exactly;  and.  as  outlined  in  the  bill,  that  canal  would  be, 
I  might  say,  a  joint  investment  for  the  United  States  and  the  Imperial  irrigation 
district  to  supply  a  great  tract  of  land  which  the  United  States  itself  is  the  proprietor 
of,  as  well  as  the  lands  now  within  the  district. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Would  that  be  upon  the  theory  that  the  Mexicans  have  no 
vested  rights  in  the  water? 

Mr.  SWING.  I  think  that  is  a  correct  statement.  In  the  hearings  in  1919  that  was 
gone  into  very  fully.  I  filed  with  the  committee  the  opinion  of  the  former  Attorney 
General,  Judson  Harmon,  in  which  he  said  there  was  no  such  thing  as  international 
water  rights  in  adjudicating  the  Rio  Grande  River  conflict. 

The  Secretary  of  State  also  filed  with  the  committee  an  opinion  that  there  was 
nothing  in  the  international  law  or  any  of  our  treaties  with  Mexico  which  would 


10  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BAS1X. 

Erevent  the  United  States  from  taking  out  in  the  United  States  and  using  in  the  United 
tates  water  of  an  American  stream  while  it  flowed  on  American  soil. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  As  I  recall  it,  Secretary  Lansing  approved  the  plan  for  building 
the  all- American  canal.  He  said  there  was  no  international  treaty  against  it. 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes.  In  frankness,  I  will  add  that  he  said  he  thought  when  the  time 
came  to  take  the  matter  up  with  Mexico — or  Mexico  took  it  up  with  us — that  he  would 
favor  a  recognition  to  some  extent  of  their  moral  claims,  but  it  was  not  what  can  be 
termed  a  legal  claim  under  any  treaty  or  international  law. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  They  claimed  20  per  cent  of  the  water  from  the  Elephant  Butte 
and  never  contributed  a  dollar. 

Mr.  SWING.  Mr.  Hudspeth,  you  know  as  well  as  I  do  that  many  people — many 
people  in  New  Mexico,  Texas,  and  Colorado — think  the  giving  away  of  the  water  of 
the  Rio  Grande  to  Mexico  was  something  our  Government  ought  not  to  have  done. 
Senator  Thomas,  in  a  powerful  speech  in  the  Senate  covering  two  days,  said  abso- 
lutely that  our  Government  had  been  fooled,  and  he  even  charged  fraud  in  the  making 
of  that  treaty,  and  he  closed  his  speech  by  saying  that  "while  it  is  too  late  to  save 
the  waters  of  the  Rio  Grande,  because  the  treaty  has  now  been  ratified,  yet  I  say 
this  is  a  warning  that  it  may  not  happen  again  on  the  Colorado." 

Mr.  LITTLE.  May  I  ask  the  gentleman  a  question? 

Mr.  SWING.  Certainly. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Have  you  stated  where  the  stock  is  owned  in  that  canal  which  is 
located  in  Mexico? 

Mr.  SWING.  That  is  owned  by  a  Mexican  company,  which  was  in  existence  when  the 
people  of  the  Imperial  Valley  through  the  Imperial  Irrigation  District  bought  the  irri- 
gation system  and  so  got  physical  possession  of  the  stock  of  that  compnay  at  that  time. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Who  did? 

Mr.  SWING.  The  directors  of  the  Imperial  Irrigation  District.  The  stock  to-day  is 
in  the  vault  of  the  Imperial  Valley  Irrigation  District,  for  whatever  it  iray  be  worth. 
It  w"as  a  part  of  what  the  district  got  for  its  $3,000,000. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  That  is,  the  stock  of  the  Canal  Co.? 

Mr.  SWING.  Of  the  Mexidan  Canal  Co. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Where  do  the  owners  of  the  land  along  that  ditch  live  mostly? 

Mr.  SWING.  They  mostly  live  in  the  United  States.  The  Southern  Pacific  at  one 
time  owned  a  large  tract  of  land,  close  to  100,000  acres.  The  Cudahy  Packing  Co. 
has  a  16,000-acre  farm  down  there.  What  is  known  as  the  Los  Angeles  Times  Syn- 
dicate, or  "the  Colorado  River  Land  &  Water  Co.,"  is  made  up  of  American  capitalists 
who  owned  some  800,000  acres  just  below  the  boundary  in  Mexico. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Those  people  own  the  land  th,at  takes  the  water  that  otherwise  goes  to 
your  valley. 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  They  are  the  interested  parties  there? 

Mr.  SWING.  I  think  they  are  to  that  extent;  they  prefer  to  keep  the  water  in  their 
own  control  for  their  own  benefit,  because  they  can  get  it  this  way,  whenever  they 
want  it,  as  much  as  they  want,  and  can  put  up  a  pretty  good  argument  as  to  what 
they  should  pay  for  it. 

The  second  menace  of  the  Imperial  Valley  is  the  Yuma  Government  project,  and 
when  I  put  it  that  way  I  am  perfectly  willing  to  turn  it  around  and  put  it  the  other 
way,  that  the  Imperial  Valley  menaces  the  Yuma  reclamation  project.  What  I 
mean  by  that  is  this:  When  Colonel  Ockerson  failed  to  close  the  break  in  the  Colorado 
River  at  what  is  called  the  Bee  River,  the  whole  river  started  flowing  down  into  what 
was  originally  Volcano  Lake,  and  then  working  its  way  out  into  the  Gulf  in  a  round- 
about way;  because  of  the  increase  from  the  break  into  Volcano  Lake  the  river  bed 
began  cutting  back,  and  this  cutting  worked  back  up  the  river  past  our  heading. 
Thus  the  lowering  of  the  bed  resulted  in  lowering  the  water  in  the  river  arid  made 
it  difficult  to  get  the  water  out  into  our  canal,  especially  during  low  seasons. 

The  problem  of  getting  water  out  of  the  river  is  ordinarily  a  serious  one,  even  with- 
out the  difficulty  which  I  have  just  described.  This  river  is  a  slow  sluggish  stream 
moat  of  the  year,  and  during  this  period  it  deposits  a  great  deal  of  silt  in  its  own  bed 
gradually  building  it  up  and  then  when  the  river  rises  and  increases  in  volume  and 
velocity,  the  weight  of  the  water,  the  pressure,  and  the  velocity  begins  to  scour  its 
bed  out,  and  nature  thus  sort  of  takes  care  of  the  flood  waters  by  deepening  its  bed 
to  accommodate  the  volume  of  the  stream.  After  three  or  four  weeks  of  this  scouring 
process  at  high  water  the  river  generally  drops  from  a  flow  of  150,000  second-feet  to 
about  20,000  second-feet  and  as  it  falls  it  becomes  an  engineering  problem  how  to 
get  the  water  out  of  the  river  without  some  control  or  diversion  works.  We  have  no 
diversion  works  in  the  river  at  our  in-take.  We  simply  have  a  great  700-foot  in-take 
or  headgate  set  in  the  bank  of  the  river.  At  the  time  we  built  it  the  silt  was  below 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  11 

the  low  scouring  point.  After  the  break  into  Bee  River  had  worked  back  up  stream  to 
our  heading  the  river  scoured  its  bed  down  below  that.  So  it  now  becomes  necessary 
every  year  to  put  in  a  diversion  dam. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  How  much  above  the  Mexican  line  is  your  intake? 

Mr.  SWING.  It  is  about  a  mile  and  a  half.  In  1916  the  settlers  on  the  Yuma  project 
in  Arizona  went  to  their  courts  and  got  an  injunction  against  our  rebuilding  the  dam 
in  the  river,  because  they  considered  it  a  menace  to  their  valley,  which  is  also  liable 
to  overflow  from  the  Colorado.  They  feared  with  that  dam  in  there  a  freshet  might 
bring  down  high  water  before  we  could  get  the  dam  out  to  let  the  water  go  by,  and 
it  might  result  in  the  river  breaking  in  on  them  and  destroying  their  valley. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  That  is  just  across  the  river  from  your  intake? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes.     It  is  the  Yuma  reclamation  project. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  How  high  above  your  intake  is  the  place  where  you  would  have  the 
intake  for  the  Ail-American  canal? 

Mr.  SWING.  About  25  miles  upstream  at  the  Laguna  Dam  built  by  the  United 
States  Government  and  originally  intended,  as  I  am  informed,  to  irrigate  lands  in 
<  'alifornia,  as  well  as  in  Arizona,  but  which  is  now  used  practically  entirely  for  Arizona 
lands. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  That  is  where  the  intake  for  the  All-American  would  be? 

Mr.  SWING.  That  is  where  it  ought  to  be,  in  our  opinion. 

Mr.  LITTLE.   Is  that  your  plan? 

Mr.  SWING.  That  is  our  plan.  We  have  a  contract  which  we  signed  with  Secretary 
Lane  when  he  was  in  office,  with  the  consent  and  approval  of  the  Yuma  people,  to 
pay  §1,600,000  for  the  privilege  of  going  up  there  and  using  that  dam  jointly  with 
the  Yuma  reclamation  project.  We  have  paid,  I  think.  896,000  on  that  according 
to  the  contract;  we  have  met  all  our  payments  as  they  fell  due. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  Do  you  have  to  take  out  that  loose-rock  dam  every  time  there  is 
flood  water? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes;  absolutely. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  How  do  you  get  it  out? 

Mr.  SWING.  We  had  to  demolish  it;  blow  it  up  with  dynamite.  The  War  Depart- 
ment is  absolutely  in  control  of  this  river.  We  have  to  get  their  permission  to  con- 
struct the  dam.  They  name  such  terms  as  they  think  proper,  and  they  tell  us  when 
the  dam  must  go  out;  in  fact,  we  have  two  authorities  to  tell  us — Yuma,  while  con- 
senting from  year  to  year  to  our  building  this  dam,  keep  their  injunction  alive  and 
require  us  to  meet  all  their  terms  and  conditions.  We  agreed  that  whenever  they 
tell  us  to  take  it  out  we  will  take  it  out. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  May  I  ask  a  question?  Does  the  land  served  by  the  present 
canal,  which,  as  I  understand,  runs  through  Mexican  territory,  or,  in  other  words, 
do  the  lands  served  both  in  Mexico  and  in  southern  California  utilize  all  of  the  waters 
of  the  Colorado  at  all  times  except  flood  stages? 

Mr.  SWING.  Not  quite  as  strong  as  that.  There  have  been  times  when,  during  low 
years,  all  of  the  water  was  diverted  at  our  heading. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  may  have  stated  it  to  the  committee  already.  But  what  is  the 
approximate  number  of  acres  now  irrigated  and  could  be  irrigated  on  the  California 
side  and  the  amount  that  is  now  irrigated  and  can  be  irrigated  on  the  American  side? 

Mr.  SWING.  In  Mr.  Davis's  report  he  gives  over  2,000,000  acres  below  the  Boulder 
Canyon — in  Nevada,  Arizona,  California,  and  Mexico — and  says  about  60  per  cent 
of  that,  I  believe,  is  in  the  United  States. 

Mi-.  RAKER.  Right  there,  you  say  60  per  cent  of  it  is  in  the  LTnited  States  and  40 
per  cent  is  in  Mexico.  If  you  have  the  ail-American  canal,  how  will  you  divide  the 
water  between  Mexico  and  the  United  States? 

Mr.  SWING.  That  would  be  a  matter  for  agreement  or  treaty. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Would  that  be  the  same  with  the  canal  now  that  is  there?  Suppose 
the  canal  was  to  continue  where  it  is  now  and  be  enlarged,  would  that  same  condition 
apply  as  to  the  agreement  or  treaty? 

Mr.  SWING.  There  would  be  this  difference:  If  the  canal  is  enlarged  and  left  in 
Mexico  where  it  is  now,  then  we  would  be  the  ones  who  would  be  asking  Mexico  to 
consent  to  put  a  limitation  on  the  amount  of  water  she  would  use,  while  if  an  all- 
American  canal  were  built,  then  Mexico  will  be  the  one  who  would  be  requesting 
the  United  States  to  agree  to  put  a  limitation  on  the  amount  of  water  Americans 
would  use  in  the  United  States.  In  one  case  Mexico  would  hold  all  the  trump  cards; 
in  the  other  we  would. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Just  amplify  that,  if  you  will. 

Mr.  SWING.   Ever  since  Mr.  Taft  was  President,  and  while  he  was  President,  various' 
interests  have  urged  upon  the  Government  to  take  up  with  Mexico  and  to  adjudicate 
a  treaty  that  would  determine  what  the  rights  were.     Personally  I  will  say  that  I 
feel  that  every  year  we  put  it  off  Mexico  is  getting  more  and  more  land  in  cultivation 


12  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

and  a  broader  basis  for  a  moral  claim  to  water.  I  understand  that  Mr.  Taft  actually 
selected  the  American  commissioners,  although  they  were  not  publicly  named. 
Then  nothing  came  of  it.  The  matter  was  'presented  to  President  Wilson  while  he 
was  President.  I  talked  to  Secretary  Lane  about  it,  but  it  was  impossible  to  get 
Mexico  to  agree  to  anything  our  Government  wanted.  I  think  down  on  the  Rio  Grande 
there  are  some  islands  in  the  river.  There  is  a  treaty  in  existence  already  that  says 
that  the  representatives  of  the  two  Governments  must  meet  and  adjudicate  their 
respective  rights  to  these  islands.  We  can  not  even  get  a  meeting  with  the  Mexican 
officials  under  that  treaty,  which  is  already  in  existence. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  We  never  did  negotiate;  we  just  took  the  island. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  think  that  was  a  proper  procedure  under  the  circumstances. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Would  that  be  the  procedure  if  we  get  the  All-American  Canal  if  they 
would  not  come  through?  I  am  just  trying  to  get  at  how  we  are  going  to  get  this  finally 
adjudicated.  Take  the  water  as  much  as  needed,  and  then  let  them  come  through? 

Mr.  SWING.  That  is  the  way  God  planned  it,  when  he  put  Mexico  on  the  lower  end 
of  the  river,  that  Mexico  should  get  what  water  was  left  after  we  got  through  using  it. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Under  your  bill,  is  it  contemplated  that  additional  lands 
would  be  reclaimed? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Aside  from  those  now  being  served? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes.  The  United  States  Government  itself  has  ] 70, 000  acres  of  land 
adjoining  the  Imperial  irrigation  district,  which  is  worthless  now,  but  which  will  be 
immensely  valuable  if  water  is  put  on  it. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Do  you  estimate  that  with  the  plan  and  scheme  in  view  that 
it  would  require  all  of  the  waters  of  the  river? 

Mr.  SWING.  No.  oh,  no.     You  mean  the  flood  waters? 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Yes. 

Mr.  SWING.  Oh,  no.  Mr.  Davis  gives  a  little  over  2.000,000  acres  of  land  in  the 
United  States  and  Mexico  below  Bowlder  Canyon  Dam.  Three  acre-feet  is  the  duty 
of  water  per  acre  per  year;  three  times  2,000.000  would  be  6.000,000  acre-feet  annually 
of  water.  The  average  annual  run-off  of  the  river  at  Bowlder  Canyon  is  17,500,000 
acre-feet.  This  dam  would  have  a  storage  capacity  of  anywhere  from  21.000.000 
acre-feet  to  31,000.000  acre-feet,  the  idea  being  to  have  it  big  enough  so  as  to  equate 
the  flow  not  only  between  months  in  the  same  years  but  between  years,  so  as  to  take 
a  reasonable  span  of  six  or  seven  years  in  order  to  carry  the  surplus  of  the  wet  years 
over  for  the  benefit  of  the  dry  years.  Thus  the  maximum  of  down-stream  develop- 
ment would  probably  not  use  in  excess  of  6,000,000  acre-feet,  leaving  11,500,000 
acre-feet  for  up-stream  development. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  During  the  dry  season  would  you  require  all  of  the  natural 
flow  of  the  stream  in  addition — 

Mr.  SWING  (interposing).  If  this  new  dam  was  not  put  in? 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Yes. 

Mr.  SWING.  Frankly,  yes,  if  there  was  no  storage. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Then  if  there  are  large  agricultural  areas  up  the  river  for  which 
no  provision  has  been  yet  made  to  take  care  of,  they  would  be  left  dry  would  they 
not? 

Mr.  SWING.  If  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  or  some  other  dam  is  not  built  these  upriver 
areas  must  remain  dry  because  all  the  low  flow  of  the  natural  stream  has  now  been 
appropriated  and  to  undertake  any  considerable  upstream  development  which  would 
substantially  diminish  the  flow  of  the  river  to  the  down  stream  communities  would 
of  course  result  in  litigation. 

With  Boulder  Dam  constructed  these  areas  in  the  upper  States  could  safely  be 
developed  because  as  I  have  already  pointed  out  the  total  that  could  be  used  in  the 
lower  Colorado,  taking  the  average  use  which  is  about  three  acre  feet  of  water  per 
year,  would  be  6,000,000  acre-feet  at  the  outside  when  all  of  this  land  in  the  United 
States  and  Mexico  has  been  put  under  cultivation,  and  the  probabilities  are  that  all 
of  that  land  will  not  be  put  under  cultivation. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  What  I  am  trying  to  get  at  is  this:  Would  this  scheme  in  any 
way  interfere  with  the  taking  out  of  water  above  the  Boulder  Dam  along  the  course 
of  the  Colorado  River  during  the  ordinary  irrigation  season,  if  you  have  conserved  the 
flood  waters  by  your  dam. 

Mr.  SWING.  Absolutely  not.  Mr.  Davis  and  Secretary  Fall,  as  I  read  their  report, 
say  "no." 

Mr.  RAKER.  How  much  more  land  can  be  irrigated  by  the  American  canal  than 
through  the  present  dam  which  they  now  have? 

Mr.  SWING.  About  400,000  acres. 

Mr.  RAKER.  On  the  California  side? 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  13 

Mr.  SWING.  On  the  California  side.     I  want  to  finish  up  this  Yuma  situation. 

Our  district  directors  went  over  there  just  a  few  weeks  ago  to  secure  permission  to 
put  this  weir  in  as  is  necessary,  if  the  people  in  the  Imperial  Valley  are  to  get 
even  domestic  water,  and  they  said  they  would  take  the  matter  under  advisement 
and  see  what  steps  we  are  taking  to  really  get  away  from  our  present  difficulties.  It 
has  been  on  condition  that  we  get  away  from  our  present  heading  and  go  up  to  Laguna 
Dam  that  we  have  received  permission  in  the  past  and  their  injunctions  are  in  effect 
against  us  every  year.  We  have  to  put  up  a  half  million  dollars  bond  each  year 
and  in  addition  we  sign  an  agreement  that  we  will  be  responsible  to  Yuma  and  their 
citizens  for  every  dollar's  worth  of  damage  that  might  result  from  a  break  in  that  river. 

So  I  say  Yuma  is  a  menace  to  us  because  we  never  know  when  they  are  going  to 
ref us?  us  permission  to  construct  the  dam ;  and  we  are  a  menace  to  them  for  the  reason 
which  I  have  already  stated. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  May  I  ask  you  a  question? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  When  did  you  last  tear  that  dam  down? 

Mr.  SWING.  It  is  always  taken  out  just  before  the  high  water  comes  down;  this 
year  about  a  month  ago. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  How  long  does  it  take  to  get  permission  from  Yuma  to  put  it  back? 

Mr.  SWING.  This  year  we  have  not  obtained  permission  yet. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  The  flood  season  is  not  yet  over. 

Mr.  SWING.  When  we  see  the  sun  rise  we  know  that  it  is  going  to  set,  and  when  we 
see  the  floods  coming,  we  know  that  it  is  going  to  be  followed  by  a  low  river  and  very 
quickly,  and  we  are  very  anxious. 

Mr.  RAKER  (interposing).  What  interests  do  these  people  represent  who  have 
obtained  this  injunction? 

Mr.  SWING.  It  is  the  farmers  and  settlers  on  the  Government  project  in  the  Yuma 
Valley,  which  is  just  across  the  river  from  where  we  have  our  dam. 

I  think  if  I  myself  was  in  the  Yuma  Valley  I  might  feel  somewhat  exercised  about 
the  matter — I  want  to  speak  frankly  about  that.  Secretary  Lane  at  the  time  when 
I  was  here  before — I  expect  to  file  data  before  the  hearings  are  through  to  show  that 
these  injunctions  are  alive  and  that  we  are  tied  up  as  tight  as  it  is  possible  to  be  tied 
with  the  situation  now — Secretary  Lane  said  referring  to  this  dam: 

"This  dam  is  such  a  menace  to  the  safety  of  the  Yuma  Valley  that  it  can  only  be 
permitted  as  a  temporary  expedient,  pending  some  adequate  provision  for  fore- 
stalling its  necessity,  such  as  this  contract  provides  for" — that  is,  the  contract  for 
connecting  with  the  Laguna  Dam — "and  unless  the  Imperial  district  takes  immediate 
steps  to  secure  a  satisfactory  and  permanent  method  to  divert  the  water  of  the  Colorado 
River,  I  will  not  again  favor  the  placing  of  such  a  structure  in  the  river. " 

The  acting  Secretary  of  War,  Benedict  Crowell,  at  the  same  time  wrote  us  a  letter, 
in  granting  us  the  permit.  He  said: 

"That  dam, "  referring  to  the  diversion  dam,  "is  regarded  as  a  serious  menace  to 
the  Yuma  project,  the  further  toleration  of  which  can  be  justified  by  this  department 
only  in  connection  with  convincing  proof,  such  as  ratification  of  the  proposed  agree- 
ment and  diligence  in  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  a  definite  and  dependable  plan 
of  diversion. " 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  is  the  dam  which  you  maintain  at  the  head  of  the  Imperial 
Valley  now? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes. 

Mr.  RAKER.  How  will  those  people  get  the  water  out  of  the  dam  if  the  American 
side  do  not  use  it  any  more  down  on  the  Mexican  side? 

Mr.  SWING.  I  do  not  know. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  am  seeking  information  on  that.  Will  they  have  to  get  it  through  the 
same  ditch  and  dam? 

Mr.  SWING.  Most  of  the  time  they  could  get  some  water  out  of  the  river  through  this 
heading  which  we  will  virtually  abandon. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  They  could  not  if  Yuma  objected? 

Mr.  SWING.  They  could  get  it  out  except  in  low  season.  Or  they  could  make  a  con- 
tract with  the  district  or  with  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  or  the  Government,  and 
get  their  water  in  that  way. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  May  I  ask  this  question,  Judge  Swing:  If  you  abandon  that  heading, 
could  not  the  Yuma  people  make  it  impossible  for  anybody  in  Mexico  to  get  water  out 
of  it? 

I  Mr.  SWING.  Oh,  yes,  certainly;  and  they  would  object,  of  course,  to  putting  in  any 
more  dams. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  It  does  not  really  deprive  the  Mexicans  of  anything  they  have  got? 
Mr.  SWING.  No;  I  think  they  would  have  the  property  that  costs  us  very  close  to 
$3,000,000. 


14  DKVELOPMEXT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  It  would  not  help  them  any  if  they  could  not  use  it? 

Mr.  SWING.  The  third  factor  and  the  main  far-tor  which  threatens  the  Imperial 
A'alley  is  the  flood  water  of  the  river  itself. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  May  I  ask  one  more  question? 

Mr.  SWING.  Ye?,  sir. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Is  the  Reclamation  Sendee  of  the  I'nited  States  the  plaintiff  in  that   s 
proceeding? 

Mr.  SWING.  No. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Who  is  it? 

Mr.  SWING.  The  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association  is  the  plaintiff. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Before  you  go  on  to  the  others,  what  is  the  name  of  that  governor  we 
met  down  there  a  year  ago  last  spring? 

Mr.  XICKEKSON.  We  cannot  keep  up  with  them.  They  have  had  four  governors 
during  the  last  vear. 

Mr.  RAKER.  When  we  were  down  there  we  spent  a  day  with  the  governor  of  Lower 
California,  the  man  who  used  to  be  the  banker,  and  he  told  us  that  they  were  ready 
and  willing  and  anxious  to  adjust  this  matter  with  the  United  States  and  would  do 
everything  they  could.  I  wanted  to  learn  why  they  were  holding  it  up  and  he  talked 
it  over  openly  and  frankly  with  Mr.  Xickerson  and  others  and  they  said  they  were 
not,  that  they  were  very  anxious  and  willing  to  get  it  to  Mexico  Citv.  and  I  wondered 
what  has  been  done  in  getting  this  matter  adjusted  so  we  would  not  have  this  bugaboo. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  think  the  State  Department  has  under  three  different  administra- 
tions taken  the  matter  up  with  Mexico  and  has  gotten  nowhere.  The  present  situa- 
tion amply  suits  them.  While  they  have  no  legal  prior  water  right,  they  have  some- 
thing just  as  good — the  physical  control  of  all  the  water. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Explain  just  how  it  suits  them. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  say.  while  they  have  no  legal  priority  of  ri^ht  to  the  water,  they  have 
the  physical  possession  of  it.  which  enables  them  to  absolutely  control  the  use  of  the 
water  and  enables  them  to  take  all  thev  want  and  when  they  want  it. 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  At  the  expense  of  the  people  on  this  side  of  the  line? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes.  sir;  we  bear  the  brunt  of  the  expense.  They  pay  something,  but 
it  is  nowhere  near  their  proportion  of  the  full  cost  of  getting  the  water  in  and  keeping 
the  flood  out. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Mr.  Swing,  does  the  recent  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the 
Colorado-Wyoming  case  throw  any  light  on  your  situation? 

Mr.  SWING.  Oh.  not  with  reference  to  Mexico.  It  seems  to  me.  however,  that  that 
decision  did  furnish  the  Colorado  River  Commission  a  yardstick  with  which  to  meas- 
ure off  the  rights  of  the  various  States  in  and  to  the  waters  of  the  river.  Do  you  not 
think  so,  Mr.  Leatherwood? 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  We  do  not  propose  to  measure  our  cloth  by  that  yardstick,  we 
will  say  very  frankly  to  you.  gentlemen,  unless  we  have  to. 

Mr.  SWING.  Well,  the  decision  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  is  usually  con- 
sidered final,  even  when  we  do  not  like  the  decision. 

Mr.  SWING.  This  river,  as  you  know,  as  all  silt-bearing  rivers,  continues  to  build 
itself  up  and  up  like  the  crater  of  a  volcano,  until  it  gets  up  to  where  the  law  of  gravit  \ 
begins  to  operate  and  pulls  it  off  down  one  bank  or  the  other. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Slop  over? 

Mr.  SWING.  Xot  only  slops  over;  it  goes  over  bodily  to  one  side  or  the  other,  and 
geologists  and  people  who  have  studied  the  Imperial  Valley  and  that  country  down 
there  say  they  believe  that  that  has  been  the  habit  of  the  river  for  a  long  period  of 
time.  Discharging  into  the  Gulf  of  California  it  pushed  its  delta  out  ahead  of  it 
across  the  gulf  and  finally  completely  divided  the  gulf,  leaving  an  inland  sea,  which 
subsequently  dried  up  and  left  the  Imperial  Valley  and  the  Coachella  Valley.  Then 
at  long  intervals  apart  it  continued  to  flow  first  into  the  Imperial  Valley  and  then 
backing  into  the  Gulf  of  California.  This  must  have  continued  for  many  centuries 
because  the  silt  in  Imperial  Valley  is  over  600  feet  deep,  showing  that  it  has  been 
carried  in  there  in  great  quantities  and  over  long  periods  of  time. 

The  river  now  is  trying  to  break  back  into  the  Imperial  Valley.  It  did  break 
through  in  1905-6.  Its  break  into  Bee  River  in  1908-9  was  another  effort.  Xext 
it  directly  attacked  our  levee  along  Volcano  Lake.  It  kept  building  up  its  bed 
alongside  the  levee  forcing  us  to  keep  raising  the  levee.  The  river  built  the  ground 
up  south  of  the  levee  8  to  10  feet  in  the  last  10  years.  It  is  an  engineering  impos- 
sibility to  raise  our  dirt  levee  much  higher.  In  flood  season  all  that  country  south 
of  our  levee,  about  20  miles  by  20  miles,  is  covered  by  a  vast  expanse  of  water,  all  * 
pressing  against  the  levee  seeking  for  a  weak  point  through  which  it  can  break.  And  * 
if  it  does  break  with  all  this  great  volume  of  water  back  of  it,  it  will  be  an  entirely 
problem  from  what  it  was  when  the  river  broke  in  1905  and  the  entire  flow  ran 
into  the  Imperial  Valley  for  nearly  a  year.  In  1905  there  was  only  the  current 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN.  15 

running  water  of  the  river.  Now,  if  it  breaks  at  Volcano  Lake  levee  there  will  be 
not  only  the  current  running  water  of  the  river  but  in  addition  an  accumulation 
piled  up  there  for  miles  behind  the  levee. 

There  is  the  menace  of  the  thing.  The  normal  land,  on  the  north  side  of  the  Vol- 
cano Lake  levee,  toward  Imperial  Valley,  is  32  feet  above  sea  level;  on  the  south  side, 
toward  the  river,  it  is  40  feet.  In  case  of  a  break  this  great  volume  of  water  would 
start  off  with  the  impetus  given  it  by  this  8-foot  fall. 

Fortunately  we  have  found  a  temporary  expediency  which  will  relieve  the  situation 
somewhat  for  a  year  or  two.  Our  engineers  recently  found  a  depression  between  the 
old  river  channel  and  the  one  where  it  is  running  now;  an  old  watercourse  called  the 
Pescadero;  they  found  by  digging  a  channel  about  4  miles,  they  could  connect 
this  old  watercourse  with  the  present  channel  of  the  river  and  divert  it  to  the  South 
away  from  Imperial  Valley  and  away  from  our  levees.  The  river  to-day,  at  110,000 
second-feet,  is  going  into  that  cut  and  through  the  old  watercourse  to  the  Gulf. 

However,  that  is  only  a  temporary  expedient.  It  is  going  to  save  Imperial  Valley 
for  the  time  being.  But  it  is  just  a  question  of  time  and  a  short  time  at  that  when  the 
silt  flowing  into  that  depression  will  fill  it  up,  as  it  has  filled  up  everything  the  river  has 
run  into;  and  we  will  then  have  the  river  back  where  it  was  before,  with  this  additional 
height  to  jump  off  from  when  it  does  jump  into  Imperial  Valley.  The  river,  according 
to  the  report  that  is  now  before  you,  carries  an  average  of  113,000  acre-feet  of  silt  per 
year.  It  is  not  a  difficult  engineering  problem  to  estimate  that  capacity  and  deter- 
mine how  long  it  will  take  to  fill  it  up  and  be  back  where  it  was  before. 

So  that  you  see  it  is  a  race  against  time  as  to  whether  you  can  construct  a  storage 
dam  and  reservoir  which  will  control  the  flood  waters  of  the  river  before  the  river 
fills  up  this  depression. 

Mr.  RAKER.  It  will  always  require  the  maintenance  of  your  railroad  and  your  dam 
there,  will  it  not? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes;  some  levee  system  will  have  to  be  maintained.  You  know  that 
country  between  Boulder  Canyon  and  our  country  has  a  desert  climate;  it  does  not 
rain  very  often,  but  when  it  does,  it  rains  in  torrents,  and  comes  down  in  cloudbursts. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  What  do  the  engineers  propose  to  do  with  that  silt  of  which 
you  have  spoken? 

Mr.  SWING.  Well,  suppose  nothing  was  done  at  all  with  it,  that  dam  would  take 
care  of  the  silt  for  nearly  three  centuries,  according  to  the  estimate  of  the  Reclamation 
Service. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  At  what  height  is  this  dam  supposed  to  be  built? 

Mr.  SWING.  At  the  capacity  of  31.000.000  acre-feet — some  600  feet  high. 

This  proposition  to  develop  the  Colorado  River  as  a  unified  project,  of  which  Boulder 
Canyon  Dam  is  only  the  first  unit,  offers  to  the  American  people  the  greatest  con- 
structive project  that  has  been  presented  to  them  for  many  years.  This  river,  begin- 
ning, as  it  does,  some  12,000  or  13,000  feet  above  sea  level,  is  a  river  at  8,000  feet 
above  sea  level;  for  half  of  its  distance  it  is  4,000  feet  above  sea  level,  running  through 
grand  canyons  and  baby  grand  canyons  and  narrow  gorges,  where  nature  has  already 
prepared  sites  for  dams;  it  seems  to  me  it  offers  a  wonderful  opportunity  for  develop- 
ment as  a  national  asset. 

Here  we  have,  year  after  year,  millions  of  acre-feet  of  water  running  to  waste,  and  a 
menace  to  life  and  property  while  it  is  running  to  waste;  and  let  me  say  just  here  what 
will  be  emphasized  by  Senator  Evans  when  he  addresses  the  committee: 

The  river,  right  at  this  time,  is  running  into  Palo  Verde — not  simply  overflowing 
its  banks:  the  river  is  running  into  Palo  Verde  now,  and  it  has  flooded  three  towns 
and  inundated  30,000  acres  of  land,  and  in  the  opinion  of  those  who  know,  we  think 
the  river  has  adopted  that  valley  for  its  future  watercourse. 

Now.  it  is  attacking  Palo  Verde  this  year;  it  may  be  Yuma  next  year,  or  it  may  bo 
the  Imperial  Valley  the  year  after.  This  river,  because  of  its  peculiar  physical 
characteristics,  offers  the  wonderful  opportunity  of  affording  a  three-in-one  project; 
flood  control,  power  development,  and  conservation  of  the  water  for  reclamation,  all 
resulting  from  one  structure. 

The  Mississippi  River,  on  which  this  Government  has  spent  $116,000,000  under  the 
Mississippi  Flood  Control  Commission — and  I  offer  no  criticism;  I  think  it  is  the  right 
thing  for  the  Government  to  do — will  not  return  one  dollar  of  that  SI  10.000,000  to  the 
Treasury  of  the  United  States,  except  in  the  added  prosperity,  and  safety  of  our  citizens. 
That  is  probably  the  only  way  you  can  handle  the  floods  on  the  bfiaauBippi.  But  here 
on  the  Colorado  you  can  absolutely  control  the  flood  situation  by  building  a  data  of  this 
kind,  and  get  back  your  money  through  the  sale  of  power  which  can  be  developed 
there. 

I  will  file  with  the  committee  in  a  few  days  a  letter  emphasizing  what  this  power 
development  means  to  the  mining  interests  of  Arizona.  Nevada,  and  Utah.  That 

1316— 22— PT  1 2 


16  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER   COLORADO    RIVER    BASIX. 

country  contains  some  of  the  greatest  mineral  deposits  in  America.  Many  of  them 
are  low-grade  ores,  but  with  a  great  quantity  of  cheap  power  to  reduce  and  transport 
tlvm  you  can  make  the  mining  proiitable  all  through  there. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  What  iield  in  Utah  will  be  reached  by  your  power  scheme? 

Mr.  SWING.  I  have  not  gone  into  that.  I  will  file  a  letter  on  that  subject.  At  the 
present  time  it  would  only  be  the  lower  part  of  that  State  that  could  be  reached.  But 
with  the  improvements  that  they  are  making  in  electrical  transmission.  Mr.  Hoover 
has  stated  that  he  believes  in  the  near  future  it  will  be  practicable  to  transmit  power 
commercially  1,000  miles,  where  to-day  it  is  only  being  transmitted  500  miles. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  That  is  "manaiia"  again. 

Mr.  SWIM;.  Well,  take  the  history  of  electrical  development,  and  how  it  has  moved 
up;  it  started  at  125  volts;  it  has  crept  up  year  by  year  until  now  they  are  sending 
220,000  volts  commercially,  and  in  the  laboratories  tests  made  this  last  year  they  have 
sent  a  voltage  of  a  million.  I  do  not  call  it  ' '  manaiia  " ;  I  call  it  to-day. 

Mr.  RAKER.  In  addition  to  the  power  possibilities,  would  not  a  great  deal  of  the 
expense  of  construction  and  maintenance  of  the  project  be  returned  by  irrigation  of 
the  lands? 

Mr.  SWIXG.  Yes.     This  land  to-day  is  worthless 

Mr.  RAKER  (interposing).  How  much  did  they  figure  that  this  land  could  stand 
that  would  be  brought  under  the  system — how  much  per  acre,  I  mean? 

Mr.  SWING.  The  report  provides  that  the  lands  shall  pay  for  all  irrigation  works; 
the  dam  itself,  it  is  estimated,  can  be  paid  for  by  the  power. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  know:  but  does  not  the  report  make  some  estimate  as  to  the  amount 
per  acre  that  the  land  ought  to  pay.  or  would  be  justified  in  paying,  if  it  is  made 
profitable  to  cultivate  and  farm  it? 

Mr.  SWING.  I  have  not  seen  that  estimate.  Land  in  our  country,  where  there  is  a 
long  growing  period  of  11  months,  will  stand  a  pretty  good  charge. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  Let  me  say  to  Judge  Raker  that  there  is  no  irrigable  land  in  the 
lower  Colorado  River  valley  with  an  adequate  water  supply  that  is  not  worth  at  least 
$200  per  acre — from  that  up. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  I  am  trying  to  get  at  is  how  much  the  land  would  be  justified 
in  paying.  If  they  have  made  an  estimate  of  2,000,000  acres  of  land  to  be  covered  by 
the  project.  60  per  cent  of  which  is  in  the  United  States,  I  want  to  find  out  what  each 
acre  of  that  land  could  properly  be  compelled  to  pay  toward  the  construction  of  the 
dam. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  That  depends  on  what  crops  the  land  can  produce,  which  fixes  its 
value.  When  I  say  to  you  that  there  is  no  land  irrigable  from  the  lower  Colorado  River 
which  would  not  be  worth  at  least  $200  an  acre,  you  can  readily  determine  what  it 
could  pay  for  an  adequate  water  supply. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  it  is  now  worthless? 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Without  irrigation,  it  is  worthless. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Will  you  point  to  the  dam  on  that  map  on  the  wall? 

Mr.  SWIXG.  I  think  this  is  Boulder  Canyon  [indicating]. 

Mr.  RAKER.  But  that  does  not  show  the  dam. 

Mr.  SWING.  There  is  a  mark  there  [indicating  on  the  map].  There  is  a  continuation 
of  Boulder  Canyon  called  Black  Canyon;  and  the  sites  are  being  prospected  along  there 
[indicating].  It  is  very  likely  that  the  extension  of  Boulder  Canyon,  known  as  Black 
Canyon,  will  contain  the  most  feasible  dam  site. 

Mr.  RAKER.  But  in  addition  to  that,  where  the  map  shows  the  watershed  outlined 
in  blue,  you  have  not  any  outline  as  to  the  territory  that  the  reservoir  would  cover, 
have  you? 

Mr.  SWIXG.  If  you  will  look  at  these  pictures  [indicating  pictures  on  wall],  you  will 
see;  these  pictures  were  taken  by  the  engineers  and  myself  some  distance  up  the 
mountain 

Mr.  RAKER  (interposing).  Then  you  have  been  down  that  canyon  and  wrote  the 
recent  article  on  ;'The  marvellous  canyon"? 

Mr.  SWIXG.  Yes;  I  have  been  there. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  have  read  of  that;  that  was  a  dangerous  trip. 

Mr.  SWIXG.  This  picture  [indicating]  shows  a  view  looking  down  the  river  into 
Boulder  Canyon  Gorge.  It  is  about  300  feet  across  at  the  water,  with  the  solid  granite 
walls  of  the  canyon  rising  2,000  feet  high,  at  an  angle  of  about  80°.  We  then  turned 
the  camera  around  on  its  tripod  upstream.  This  [indicating]  shows  the  reservoir  site, 
one  of  the  finest  in  the  United  States.  It  is  estimated  that  the  dam  will  back  water 
40  miles  up  the  Colorado  and  30  miles  up  the  Virgin  River,  which  joins  the  Colorado  a 
few  miles  above  the  dam  site. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Will  you  state  for  the  benefit  of  the  committee  the  height  of  that  pro- 
posed dam?  You  have  two  or  three  levels  estimated  for? 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN.  17 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes:  that  is  shown  in  the  report. 

Mr.  RAKER.  But  can  you  not  indicate  it  on  that  map  so  that  it  can  be  visualized? 

Mr.  SWING.  I  can  not  show  it  on  the  map,  but  it  can  be  found  at  page  21  of  the 
report. 

Now,  just  a  few  more  comments  while  I  am  on  the  subject  of  power.  I  received 
a  few  months  ago — and  I  think  all  of  you  did — a  report  from  Mr.  George  Otis  Smith, 
the  Director  of  the  Geological  Survey 

Mr.  RAKER  :  inter  posing).  You  did  not  quite  answer  my  question. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  beg  your  pardon.     What  is  it? 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  mean,  you  have  the  length  of  the  dam  and  the  height,  and  you  have 
the  watershed  on  that  map,  and  the  location  of  your  dam;  but  you  have  not  marked 
on  the  map  the  territory  that  the  reservoir  would  cover — just  to  visualize  it. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  can  not  show  it  on  that  map. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  can  not  do  it  now;  but  if  you  could  have  that  map  changed  to 
show  it,  that  would  be  valuable  to  the  committee. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  That  dam  simply  fills  the  gorge. 

Mr.  SWING.  Of  course,  the  dam  fills  the  gorge;  but  he  wanted  shown  on  the  map 
the  extent  of  the  territory  the  reservoir  would  cover. 

Mr.  HA  YUEN.  The  area  of  the  reservoir  can  not  be  accurately  shown  on  a  map  of 
that  scale,  which  comprises  parts  of  seven  States;  but  if  you  will  examine  the  Davis 
report  you  will  find  detailed  maps  which  show  the  capacity  of  10  various  proposed 
reservoirs. 

Mr.  SWING.  Let  me  say  this,  because  I  have  utilized  all  of  my  time:  The  Geological 
Survey  have  gotten  out  a  report  which,  as  I  read  it,  says  this:  That  if  these  three 
factors  are  constant,  the  present  known  oil  supply  in  America,  the  present  quantity 
of  consumption  in  America,  and  the  present  importation  of  oil  from  foreign  fields — 
if  these  three  factors  remain  constant  for  a  period  of  20  years,  the  total  oil  supply  of 
America  will  be  exhausted. 

I  think  that  is  the  most  startling  statement  that  can  possibly  be  made  as  to  our 
future.  It  means  that  we  must  begin  at  once  to  find  a  substitute  for  and  a  supple- 
ment to  oil,  or  this  country  is  soing  to  suffer  greatly. 

Mr.  RAKER.  In  other  words.  Judge  Swing,  this  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  and  the 
results  coming  from  it,  not  only  from  irrigation,  but  from  electric  power  and  energy, 
as  to  these  great  Western  States,  has  about  the  same  relation  to  them  as  Muscle  Shoals 
has  to  the  southern  part  of  the  United  States? 

Mr.  SWING.  I  think  we  feel  as  keenly  about  this  in  the  Southwest  as  they  do  about 
Muscle  Shoals  in  the  South;  that  it  will  be  one  of  the  greatest  benefits  to  the  country. 

This  is  only  one  unit  of  the  development  that  is  proposed.  Secretary  Hoover 
speaks  of  10  dams,  beginning  here  [indicating  on  map]  and  going  up  the  stream,  as 
the  complete  Colorado  River  project. 

And  I  want  to  speak  for  the  complete  project.  I  am  not  here  for  just  one  propo- 
sition. I  honestly  believe  that  this  project,  the  completed  project  of  the  Colorado 
River,  will  be  one  of  the  most  profitable  assets  and  resources  that  this  country  could 
possibly  develop.  I  think  the  returns  that  it  would  brine:  to  the  American  people 
would  be  many  times  greater  than  the  returns  from  the  Panama  Canal,  as  .great  as 
that  is.  That  was  built  for  the  world.  The  citizens  along  the  coast  line  get  the  benefit 
of  that.  But  this  project,  in  returns  to  the  American  people,  will  be  many  times 
greater. 

I  think  it  has  got  to  be  developed  as  a  comprehensive  whole.  I  can  no  more  think 
of  the  Government  leasing  out  different  segments  of  this  river  to  independent  and 
possibly  hostile  operating  concerns — one  for  irrigation,  and  another  for  power  develop- 
ment, each  one  running  his  part  of  it  in  his  own  way  and  for  his  own  purposes  and  his 
own  gain  in  disregard  of  the  effect  on  the  rest  of  the  river — than  I  can  think  of  taking 
a  great  transcontinental  railroad  line,  dividing  it  up  into  segments  and  leasing  them 
to  independent  operating  companies,  and  then  trying  to  run  transcontinental  trains 
through  from  coast  to  coast  without  having  wrecks  on  every  mile. of  the  road. 

Mr.  RAKER.  There  are  now  many  applications  from  organizations  and  institutions 
for  these  sites  in  piecemeal,  are  there  not? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes.  And  nothing  could  be  a  greater  mistake  to  the  country,  in  looking 
to  the  future,  than  to  have  these  reservoirs  developed  in  a  hit  or  miss,  haphazard 
wav.  and  possibly  at  cross  purposes  with  each  other;  because  what  is  done  on  one  part 
of  the  river  directly  affects  every  other  part  of  the  river  above  and  below  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Your  judgment  is,  from  your  study  of  this  subject,  that  all  of  these 
should  be  disallowed  and  the  matter  should  be  handled  and  developed  and  improved 
by  the  Government  as  one  project? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes.  I  say  the  Government,  because  I  think  it  is  the  only  agency  that 
can  coordinate  the  various  interests  and  activities  and  develop  the  various  properties 


18  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

on  this  river  and  impartially  distribute  the  benefits.  The  Government  would  develop 
the  project  for  the  benefit  of  its  citizens,  and  those  citizens  living  in  the  States  adjoin- 
ing the  river  would,  of  course,  yet  the  greater  direct  return  from  the  development. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  I  think  we  agree  as  to  that.  But  I  want  to  ask  you  one  ques- 
tion: Does  not  that  contemplate,  however,  the  final  determination  of  the  commission 
now  working  upon  the  question  of  allocating  those  waters? 

Mr.  S  \vi\r;.   I  hope  the  Colorado  River  Commission  will  arrive,  and  speedily  arrive,    t] 
at  an  agreement.     The  results  of  the  six  meetings  that  have  thus  far  been  held  have   ^ 
been  very  discouraging.     It  seems  to  be  almost  impossible  for  them  to  reach  an  agree- 
ment.    If  they  ever  reach  an  agreement.  I  should  be  very  glad  to  see  that  agreement 
v  ritten  right  into  this  bill.     But  Imperial  Valley  can  not  wait  an  indeterminate 
length  of  time  for  an  agreement  by  the  commission  any  more  than  they  can  wait  an 
indeterminate  length  of  time  for  Mexico  to  enter  into  a  treaty. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Would  not  that  be  a  very  strong  argument  for  this  commission 
to  definitely  determine  whether  it  is  going  to  decide  anything  or  not? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes;  I  agree  with  you  as  to  that. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  to  you  that  I  heartily  agree  with  your 
general  proposition,  but  I  want  to  know  how  these  waters  are  going  to  be  allocated". 

Mr.  SWING.  In  this  bill,  I  left  that  out,  because,  as  I  say,  when  they  reach  an  agree- 
ment their  agreement  can  be  embodied  into  this  legislation;  but  as  to  the  power,  this 
bill  says,  "Provided,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  shall  hold  hearings  and  shall 
allocate  the  power  privileges  among  the  states  according  to  their  equitable  rights  and 
interests  therein." 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  I  will  say.  Judge  Swing,  that  it  seems  to  me  that  you  have 
made  out  a  case  this  morning  sufficient  to  show  that  it  is  highly  important  and  neces- 
sary that  this  commission  should  finish  up  its  work  and  make  a  final  report. 

Mr.  SWING.  No  man  would  say  "Amen"  to  that  louder  or  more  earnestly  than  I 
would. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  I  do  not  see  why  a  commission  should  fool  around  and  waste 
time  for  four  or  five  years,  in  a  matter  of  this  importance,  as  they  usually  do. 

Mr.  SWING.  Why,  if  a  ship  like  the  Lusitania  with  1.500  people  on  board  were  to 
send  in  an  S.  O.  S.  that  it  was  sinking,  you  know  that  our  Government  would  stop 
every  activity  if  necessary  in  order  to  afford  it  relief.  And  yet  here  in  Imperial  Valley 
you  have  50,000  people  who  are  in  imminent  danger 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD  (interposing).  I  do  not  know  how  many  States  I  can  speak  for 
in  this  matter.  We  are  anxious  to  join  with  you;  but  I  can  say  for  one  of  the  States, 
that  we  want  to  know  where  we  will  come  out  as  to  the  upper  waters  of  the  river; 
and  when  we  can  find  out  where  we  will  come  out  on  the  matter,  we  will  join  you 
shoulder  to  shoulder. 

Mr.  SWING.  This  scheme  has  wonderful  possibilities  if  it  is  carried  out;  there  is  not 
a  man  who  has  studied  the  Colorado  River  that  has  not  been  carried  away  with  the  pos- 
sibilities that  it  offers.  When  Franklin  K.  Lane  came  in  as  Secretary  of  the  Interior, 
he  knew  the  Colorado  River  merely  as  a  stream  that  had  to  be  crossed  on  the  way  from 
the  East  to  the  West.  Eastern  people  know  very  little  about  the  Colorado  River, 
because  the  channels  of  trade  and  travel  do  not  run  parallel  to  it;  they  bisect  it. 
But  before  Mr.  Lane  left  office,  he  would  have  given  anything  in  his  power  to  have 
been  able  to  say  that  the  development  of  the  Colorado  River  was  started  by  him. 
And  the  same  thing  is  true  of  Secretary  Fall.  Each  man  who  studies  into  the  matter 
soon  comes  to  see  that  here  is  a  gold  mine  awaiting  development.  Secretary  Hoover 
says  it  will  be  the  most  talked  of  project  in  America  within  the  next  two  years. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  is  the  matter  with  the  commission  that  they  do  not  get  out  their 
report?  Or  I  will  put  it  this  way:  What  is  the  fact  that  is  holding  their  report  up? 
I  think  that  is  the  better  way  to  put  it. 

Mr.  SWING.  In  those  cases  you  have  to  determine  water  rights;  and  you  know  as 
well  as  I  do  that  that  is  one  of  the  most  complicated  subjects  there  is  to  handle  even  by 
trained  jurists. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Well,  why  do  they  not,  through  our  State  Department,  adjust  this 
other  question  of  international  water  rights,  so  that  \ve  will  have  that  cleaned  up  and 
be  able  to  put  it  through  without  complications? 

Mr.  SWIM;.  I  will  be  glad  to  see  that  done. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Permit  rue  to  make  it  plain  to  the  committee  that  I  do  not  want  to  see 
any  agreement  or  treaty  made  with  Mexico  until  we  have  settled  our  own  troubles 
in  the  United  States.  We  must  first  know  the  ultimate  possibilities,  so  far  as  irrigation 
is  concerned,  within  the  United  States.  All  of  the  facts  should  be  adequately  deter- 
mined before  Congress  or  the  American  Government  concedes  any  water  rights  to  any  / 
foreign  country. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  19 

Mr.  SWING.  I  agree  with  you. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Mexico  should  be  made  to  wait,  and  can  very  well  be  made  to  wait. 
The  longer  the  Mexicans  are  compelled  to  wait  and  to  observe  that  the  waters  of  the 
Colorado  River  are  being  applied  to  beneficial  uses  within  the  United  States,  the  more 
reasonable  they  will  be  in  dealing  with  our  Government. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  do  not  get  my  point.  We  have  the  territory  and  we  have  the 
water  and  we  should  push  the  project.  But  the  point  is  that  while  we  are  adjusting 
pur  complications  in  our  own  States,  we  have  a  complication  below  with  Mexico  that 
it  seems  to  me  can  well  be  adjusted. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  There  is  no  need  for  haste  in  arriving  at  any  such  adjustment  with 
Mexico.  I  am  convinced,  as  any  one  who  has  studied  the  facts  and  the  law  must 
be,  that  there  is  no  legal  obligation  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  to  give  one  drop 
of  water  to  Mexico,  for  which  a  beneficial  use  can  be  found  within  the  United  States. 
Let  us  start  out  on  that  basis.  We  may  ultimately  treat  with  Mexico;  but  so  far  as 
I  am  concerned,  I  shall  oppose  any  kind  of  agreement  recognizing  any  kind  of  a 
Mexican  water  right  in  the  Colorado  River  until  it  is  definitely  and  finally  determined 
that  there  is  a  surplus  of  water  in  that  stream  for  which  there  is  no  possible  use  in  the 
United  States. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Your  theory  is  that  we  have  absolute  control  of  all  of  that  water,  and 
can  dam  it  up  and  take  it  away,  and  do  as  we  please  with  it? 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  There  is  no  doubt  about  that. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  You  think  the  States  should  first  settle  their  rights? 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Yes.  And  that  is  why  the  Colorado  River  Commission  was  estab- 
lished by  Congress  and  the  seven  States  of  the  Colorado  River  basin. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  That  is  what  I  say. 

Mr.  SWING.  In  conclusion  may  I  say  that  I  hope  the  committee  will  have  such 
hearings  as  are  necessary  to  inform  itself  on  this  proposition  and  enable  it  to  determine 
what  in  its  opinion  is  the  broad  and  statesmanlike  policy  to  pursue  in  this  matter; 
and  that  then  it  will  get  busy  and  help  us  to  get  this  started. 

When  we  were  here  in  1919  you  sent  us  away  to  await  the  determination  of  this  board 
of  inquiry  which  was  appointed  under  the  Kinkaid  bill — which  this  committee 
reported  to  the  House  and  had  passed  by  Congress.  Under  that  law  the  report  of  that 
commission  was  prepared.  The  Government  appropriated  $20,000  for  its  expenses. 
The  Imperial  Irrigation  District  was  supposed  to  match  that,  dollar  for  dollar.  Instead 
we  appropriated  $40,000  to  begin  with.  Then  we  appropriated  $30,000  additional, 
making  $70,000;  and  we  have  recently  appropriated  $30,000  more,  making  a  total  of 
$100,000  advanced  by  Imperial  Valley  to  enable  the  Government  officials  to  make  as 
exhaustive  an  investigation  as  they  cared  to  make.  We  are  now  back  here  again 
at  the  earliest  possible  moment  after  the  official  report  was  completed  to  represent 
this  matter  to  you;  and  this  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  we  approve  in  the 
main,  and  think  it  is  a  step  in  the  right  direction. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  If  we  have  to  wait  for  this  commission  to  determine  the  water  rights 
when  can  we  go  ahead  with  any  idea  of  accomplishing  something? 

Mr.  SWING.  Those  commissioners  could  get  together  and  reach  an  agreement  within 
30  or  60  days.  Whether  they  will  do  that  or  not  I  do  not  know.  That  was  the  hope 
that  we  had  in  starting  it  that,  instead  of  having  to  have  cases  go  through  the  district 
court,  the  circuit  court  of  appeals,  and  the  supreme  court,  and  then  back  again — and 
not  for  one  community  alone,  but  for  150  communities  as  each  community  litigated 
its  water  rights  with  its  neighbor  and  with  the  rest  of  the  149,  through  a  period  of  50 
years,  with  the  resulting  waste  of  time  and  money  and  holding  back  the  development 
of  the  country,  these  men  on  this  commission,  honest  men,  citizens,  neighbors, 
and  representatives  of  the  people  who  will  derive  the  greatest  benefit  by  having  the 
Government  do  this  work,  would  get  together  and  say,  "Let  us  cut  out  the  red  tape; 
let  us  cut  out  the  delay  and  loss  of  time  in  getting  the  thing  started;  and  let  us  agree 
on  this  thing  as  friends  and  neighbors  and  men.  Let  us  enter  into  an  agreement  and 
get  this  thing  started,  so  that  in  our  day  and  age,  and  while  we  are  still  alive,  we  can 
see  some  of  the  many  benefits  returned  to  our  country. " 

Mr.  HARBOUR.  Yes;  but  if  we  have  to  wait  until  they  get  through,  we  may  have  to 
wait  a  long  time. 

Mr.  SwiNc;.  Well,  I  will  say  that  we  in  the  Imperial  Valley  and  the  people  of  the 
Lower  Colorado  River  can  not  wait.  As  I  said  before,  I  will  say  very  earnestly  again, 
that  this  is  a  race  against  time.  Here  is  this  little  depression  that  can  take  care  of  that 
silt  for  four  or  five  years.  After  the  water  that  will  again  back  up  onto  Imperial 
Valley,  as  it  did  in  1905  and  190G;  and  when  it  does  there  will  be  a  much  grea lei- 
flood  and  a  much  greater  disaster  than  there  was  before.  So  that  it  is  a  race  against 
time  to  get  this  dam  started. 


20  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO    J1IYKK   BASIN. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Let  me  ask  you  this  question:  As  I  said  a  moment  ago,  I 
represent  a  State  that  is  anxious  to  cooperate.  It  is  a  State,  however,  that  has  a 
great  many  fertile  acres  that  it  is  possible  to  reclaim  from  this  river  and  its  tributa- 
ries. Now,  do  you  not  think  that  it  is  highly  important,  in  order  to  solve  this  ques- 
tion, that  some  decision  be  made  as  to  the  allocation  of  those  waters? 

You  say  that  you  can  not  wait  down  in  your  country.     I  do  not  care  to  take  the    SL 
time  of  the  committee  to  discuss  that  now.     But  if  you  go  ahead  with  this  project    U 
and  allow  this  commission  simply  to  hold  back  and  do  nothing,  and  no  agreement  is 
reached  as  between  the  States,  then  you  may  foreclose  States  having  thousands  of 
acres  up  the  river,  which  would  be  affected  from  future  development,  and  I  say  that 
they  can  not  afford  to  sit  still  and  see  a  decree  entered  against  them  without  protest. 
Now,  what  we  want  to  do  is  to  avoid  the  protest. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  think  you  and  Mr.  Arentx  and  Mr.  Montoya  and  Mr.  Hayden  and  I 
could  sit  here  and  reach  a  reasonable  agreement  in  short  order.  But  if  you  have 
read  the  hearings  of  the  commission  carefully.  I  think  you  will  not  blame  the  failure 
to  reach  an  agreement  upon  the  representatives  from  California.  New  Mexico,  Arizona, 
or  Nevada. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  I  am  not  protesting  or  complaining;  I  am  simply  stating  our 
attitude. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  will  say  that  the  delay  is  not  due  to  the  position  taken  or  the  conten- 
tions made  by  the  representatives  from  Arizona,  California,  Nevada,  or  New  Mexico. 
There  were  people  on  that  commission,  however,  who  did  not  want  to  reach  an  agree- 
ment. If  this  committee  will  take  action  on  my  bill,  it  will  do  more  than  anything 
else  to  hurry  an  agreement  of  the  Colorado  River  Commission. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  I  do  not  want  to  terminate  the  hearing  this  morning  abruptly;  but 
on  account  of  matters  that  will  come  up  in  the  House  to-day,  in  which  several  members 
of  the  committee  are  concerned,  it  will  be  necessary  to  adjourn  the  meeting. 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes;  I  came  here  merely  to  introduce  this  delegation  to  the  commit- 
tee. It  was  intended  that  they  should  do  the  talking,  instead  of  which  I  have  taken 
all  the  time. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  \Ve  will  adjourn  until  10.30  o'clock  to-morrow. 

Mr.  SWING.  Thank  you  for  the  opportunity. 

(Thereupon,  at  12  o'clock  noon,  the  committee  adjourned  until  Fridav,  June  16. 
1922,  at  10.30  o'clock  a.  m.) 

COMMITTEE  ON  IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Friday,  June  16,  1922. 

The  committee  met  at  10.30  o'clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  M.  P.  Kinkaid  (chairman)  presiding. 
The  CHAIRMAN.  Gentlemen  of  the  committee,  we  have  before  us  to-day  Director 
Davis,  of  the  Reclamation  Service,  and  I  take  it  we  are  now  ready  to  hear  him. 

STATEMENT  OF  MB.  ARTHUR  P.  DAVIS,  DIRECTOR  RECLAMATION 

SERVICE. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Mr.  Chairman,  on  the  recommendation  of  this  committee  the  Congress 
passed  an  act  in  1920,  approved  on  May  18  of  that  year,  ' '  To  provide  for  an  examination 
and  report  on  the  condition  and  possible  irrigation  development  of  the  Imperial  Valley 
in  California." 

The  report  thus  called  for  by  Congress  lias  been  recently  printed  and  is  in  the  hands 
of  the  committee.  In  pursuance  of  the  idea  which  was  back  of  that  act  of  Congress 
and  of  the  recommendations  of  the  report,  this  bill,  H.  R.  11449,  has  been  introduced, 
and  a  report  has  been  received  from  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  recommending, 
with  minor  amendments,  that  it  do  pa-^. 

The  report  is  e-^ontially  that  of  Secretary  Fall,  personally.  Recommendations 
were  made  by  the  Reclamation  Service  but  were  modified  in  the  Secretary's  office 
and  very  carefully  gone  over  by  him  in  person  and  modified  to  a  considerable  extent, 
and  in  my  judgment  improved.  The  legislation  for  currying  out  the  recommenda- 
tions of  this  report  consists,  in  the  main,  in  the  recommendation  for  the  building 
of  a  canal  to  irrigate  the  high  lands  and  serve  the  low  lands  also,  of  the  Imperial 
Valley,  diverted  at  the  Laguna  Dam  about  12  miles  above  the  city  of  Yurna.  be- 
tween southern  Arizona  and  California:  also  the  constni'-iion  of  a  reservoir  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Boulder  Canyon  near  Las  Vegas,  Nev.,  which  would  have  a  capacity  /" 
large  enough  to  conserve  and  regulate  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  River,  The. pri- 
mary purpose  of  that  reservoir  is  to  control  the  waters  and  bring  to  an  end,  so  far  as 
that  may  do  so,  the  menace  to  the  Imperial  Valley.  That  menace  is  one  that  has  been 
standing  and  has  been  growing  for  many  years. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX.  21 

The  Colorado  River  drains  a  very  large  basin — about  244,000  square  miles.  Through 
the  upper  part  the  precipitation  is  largely  in  the  form  of  snow  and  comes  off  in  the 
spring  and  early  summer  and  forms  a  very  large  stream  in  the  process  always.  Through 
the  middle  portion  the  river  and  its  tributaries  flow  through  canyons  that  they  have 
eroded  and  are  still  eroding  in  the  course  toward  the  sea.  In  that  course  the  river 
has  a  very  large  fall  and  the  erosive  power  is  very  great.  With  sand  cut  loose  from 
the  rock — -the  water  using  that  sand  as  a  tool  grinds  away  on  the  remaining  rock  and 
accumulates  more  and  more  of  these  tools  and  as  it  passes  through  the  canyon  be- 
comes a  stream  very  heavily  ladened  with  sediment. 

At  the  southern  line  of  Nevada,  where  it  is  proposed  to  build  a  reservoir,  it  is 
estimated  from  observations  that  the  river  discharges  an  average  amount  of  over 
80,000  acre-feet  of  sediment  annually.  The  annual  discharge  of  the  river  at  that 
point  will  average  about  17,500,000  acre-feet,  a  portion  of  which  is  lost  by  evapora- 
tion and  seepage  before  it  reaches  Laguna  Dam. 

The  problems  of  this  river  are  largely  complicated  by  the  irregular  flow.  The 
water  is  used  to  some  extent  for  irrigation  in  the  upper  basin;  about  1,500,000  acres 
are  irrigated  in  that  region,  and  the  balance  flows  down  through  the  canyon.  In 
some  parts  of  the  basin  all  of  the  low  water  flow  is  already  appropriated  and  diverted. 
That  is  true  of  many  of  the  smaller  tributaries  and  of  Grand  River,  the  largest  tribu- 
tary, in  the  neighborhood  of  Grand  Junction,  Colo.,  but  the  river  has  many  tribu- 
taries below  those  points  and  discharges  large  quantities  of  water  in  the  flood  season 
not  now  appropriated  or  used  in  any  way.  .So  that  with  the  deduction  that  irriga- 
tion makes  in  the  upper  basin,  the  discharge  at  Boulder  Canyon  will  average  about 
17,500,000  acre-feet  per  annum.  This  comes  largely  in  the  spring  and  earL  summer 
months;  the  rest  of  the  year,  about  eight  months,  is  mainly  seasons  of  low  water. 
The  low  water  flow  is  diverted  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  Mexican  line  for  the  irriga- 
tion of  Imperial  Valley  and  at  Laguna  Dam  for  the  irrigation  of  the  Yuma  project 
and  in  extreme  low  years,  the  low  water  flow  is  all  diverted  for  those  purposes  and 
there  have  been  slight,  although  not  disastrous,  shortages  of  water  once  or  twice  it, 
their  history,  and  as  the  irrigation  grows,  of  course,  that  is  likely  to  be  intensified, 
and  no  very  large  expansion  of  irrigation  in  the  Imperial  Valley  or  any  other  part 
of  the  lower  stream  is  possible  without  the  storage  of  water  for  irrigation.  Thus, 
regulation  for  storage  constitutes  a  secondary  but  very  important  function  of  the 
storage  that  is  proposed. 

In  the  investigations  that  have  been  in  progress  in  this  river  basin  through  the 
last  25  years,  a  great  deal  of  information  has  been  compiled  and  stream  measure- 
ments have  been  made  at  various  points.  Irrigation  has  been  growing  and  the  infor- 
mation has  been  accumulating.  We  have  investigated  many  irrigation  projects  in 
all  of  the  States  which  are  drained  by  this  river,  seven  in  number.  In  Wyoming  there 
are  possibilities  of  irrigation  and  water  storage.  There  are  some  in  Utah  and  a  still 
larger  number  in  Colorado.  There  are  some  in  New  Mexico,  and  Arizona  can  use  a 
large  portion  of  the  waters  of  the  tributaries  of  the  Colorado  when  they  are  developed. 
There  is  also  some  use  possible  in  southern  Nevada,  although  only  a  small  area  is 
drained  and  that  is  relatively  arid  in  character.  But  the  largest  area  which  can  be 
served  from  the  Colorado  River  is  in  California.  There  are  some  small  valleys,  but 
the  Imperial  Valley  is  the  bulk  of  the  irrigation  possible  in  that  State  from  the  Colorado 
River. 

As  irrigation  grows  in  the  upper  basin  and  throughout  the  basin,  the  water  supply 
will  be  more  or  less  consumed,  and  if  that  growth  continues  the  present  appropriations 
of  water  on  the  lower  river  would  be  embarrassed  and  would  be  interfered  with, 
unless  some  means  were  taken  to  interfere  with  the  development  above,  and  this 
problem  really  brought  to  the  engineers  investigating  this  project  the  fact  that  while 
there  is  an  abundance  of  water  in  the  Colorado  River  basin,  if  properly  conserved, 
to  serve  all  the  lands  that  can  be  feasibly  and  economically  reached  and  served  from 
that  river,  that  is  not  true  unless  the  river  is  properly  regulated  and  conserved,  and 
with  the  recognition  of  the  prior  right  of  early  appropriators  to  the  water  which  they 
appropriate,  now  recognized  by  all  of  the  seven  States  which  this  river  drains,  and  also 
by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  as  being  the  ruling  law  on  this  subject, 
the  strict  enforcement  of  which  would  prevent  any  further  development  in  the  upper 
basin  during  the  low-water  season.  If  the  priorities  already  acquired  on  the  lower  river 
were  strictly  enforced  they  would  interfere  with  any  further  development  of  the  low- 
water  flow  in  the  upper  basin;  and  to  prevent  that  interference  and  permit  the  full 
development  of  the  States  above,  six  of  which  can  utilize  the  tributaries  of  the  ( 'olorado 
River — all  of  them  can  except  California — to  prevent  interference  with  their  develop- 
ment, it  is  necessary  to  conserve  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  River  and  regulate  it  so 
that  the  further  diversion  of  the  low-water  flow  in  the  upper  basin  will  not  interfere 
either  with  present  irrigation  or  with  further  development  in  the  lower  basin. 


22  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  May  I  ask  you  a  question  there,  Mr.  Davis? 
Mr.  DAVIS.  Certainly. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Would  it  be  practicable  to  make  a  brief  statement  here  of  the  lower 
rights  that  have  been  developed  that  would  interfere  with  the  upper  rights,  stating 
what  they  were  and  the  amount  of  each,  and  under  what  right  they  arose. 
Mr.  DAVIS.  The  figures  on  that — 

Mr.  LITTLE  (interposing).  I  did  not  mean  for  you  to  do  that  just  now.  fl 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  can  put  that  in  the  record  at  this  point.     The  principal  developments    V 
in  the  lower  basin  are  the  Imperial  Valley  and  the  Yuma  project  and  some  small 
diversions  above  those  points,  but  those  two  are  the  main  ones. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  That  is  not  it.  What  I  wanted  to  get  was  a  statement  of  what  settled, 
legal  right  they  had  that  gave  them  a  priority,  and  how  great  the  amount  was. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  priority  is  due  to  use,  to  the  present  irrigated  area  which  is  the 
best  index  to  the  answer  to  your  question,  and  is  about  400,000  acres  in  the  Im- 
perial Valley  irrigation  district. 
Mr.  SWING.  About  415,000. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  About  415,000  acres  in  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  and  about  120,000 
appropriated,  of  which  about  two-thirds  has  been  used,  on  the  Yuma  project. 
Mr.  LITTLE.  Then  there  is  no  statutory  provision  that  would  have  that  effect. 
Mr.  DAVIS.  No  statutory  provision.     There  are  statutory  provisions  in  the  individual 
States  that  give  priority  of  right  and  which  would  apply  against  any  other  appropriator 
in  that  State.    The  Supreme  Court  of  -the  United  States  recently  handed  down  a 
decision  sustaining  that  principle. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Would  you  be  good  enough  to  put  that  decision  in  the  record? 
Mr.  DAVIS.  Certainly.     I  have  not  yet  received  a  copy  of  that  decision  and  it  is 
only  rumor  as  to  just  what  it  provides,  but  I  think  that  is  correct. 
Mr.  SWIXG.  That  was  in  the  case  of  Wyoming  r.  Colorado. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  inquired  of  the  clerk  of  the  Supreme  Court  yesterday  who  said  that 
the  decision  would  probably  be  available  early  next  week.  I  hope  that  it  can  be 
printed  in  these  hearings. 

(NOTE. — The  Supreme  Court  decision  referred  to  is  printed  at  the  conclusion  of  Mr. 
Davia's  remarks.) 

Mr.  RAKER.  Is  there  any  contest  between  the  Yuma  project  and  the  Imperial 
Valley  now  as  to  the  priorities. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  No,  sir;  that  was  settled  by  contract  a  few  years  ago.  The  Secretary 
of  the  Interior,  on  behalf  of  the  Yuma  project  and  also  of  the  United  States,  entered 
into  a  contract  with  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  in  which  a  division  is  made  of 
the  waters  there  definitely. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So  that  question  is  settled. 
Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Where  does  this  contest  come  from,  spoken  of  yesterday  relative  to 
some  one  serving  an  injunction  upon  the  Imperial  Valley  people  for  putting  in  this 
dam  which  they  put  in  every  year  to  divert  the  water. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  That  comes  from  the  Yuma  project.  That,  however,  is  not  a  contest 
over  water.  It  is  a  fear  on  the  part  of  the  Yuma  project  that  a  diversion  dam  built 
near  the  Mexican  line,  a  few  miles  below  Yuma,  will  imperil  that  valley  by  diverting 
the  river  into  it.  It  is  a  dam  that  is  necessary  to  divert  water  into  the  Imperial 
Canal.  That,  however,  I  understand,  is  in  process  of  settlement.  There  is  a  contract 
entered  into  by  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  with  the  United  States,  the  same  one 
that  divided  the  waters,  and  that  provides  that  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  shall 
build  a  high-line  canal  and  take  its  water  from  the  Laguna  Dam,  and  the  contract 
provides  for  the  right  to  do  that,  and  for  the  obligation  also.  When  the  water  is  all 
taken  from  the  Laguna  Dam,  which  is  a  dam  with  rock  abutments,  so  that  there  is  no 
danger  of  the  river  going  around  it  and  one  which  has  been  in  service  a  long  time, 
then  the  menace  of  a  diversion  below  will  be  removed.  That  menace  would  be 
partly  removed  by  the  regulation  of  the  river. 

The  Reclamation  Service  has  built  a  number  of  projects  in  the  basin  of  the  Colorado 
River.  Two  are  in  the  State  of  Colorado,  one  taking  water  from  the  Gunnison  River, 
a  tributary  of  the  Grand  River,  and  one  taking  water  directly  from  the  Grand  River, 
called  the  Uncompahsre  project  and  the  Grand  Valley  project.  There  is  a  project 
in  Utah  taking  water  from  the  drainage  of  the  Colorado  River  into  the  drainage  of 
Utah  Lake,  and  that  is  known  as  the  Strawberry  Valley  project.  There  is  a  project 
also  on  the  drainage  of  the  Colorado  in  Arizona,  storing  water  in  the  Roosevelt  Reser- 
voir on  Salt  River  for  use  in  the  Salt  River  Valley,  which  is  a  tributary  of  the  Colorado.  ,, 
There  are  other  projects  that  have  been  investigated,  but  before  and  after  the  adoption  / 
of  these  projects  that  have  been  built  and  show  that  there  is  a  considerable  expansion 
of  irrigation  still  possible,  there  being  a  possibility  of  building  that  irrigation  up  to 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  23 

about  4,000,000  acres  in  the  total,  instead  of  1,500,000  acres.  In  order  to  do  that  it 
is  necessary  to  build  reservoirs,  and  in  investigating  this  whole  problem  investiga- 
tions have  been  made  as  to  the  storage  of  water  in  all  promising  places  in  the  entire 
basin,  and  it  has  been  found  that  storage  reservoirs  of  large  capacity  and  feasible  of 
construction  at  moderate  cost  can  be  built  on  Grand  River,  the  lowest  one  being  at 
Dewey  and  the  upper  one  being  known  as  the  Kremmling  Reservoir.  Reservoirs 
are  also  possible  and  feasible  on  the  Green  River.  The  one  that  seems  to  be  the  most 
promising  at  the  present  time  is  in  Flaming  Gorge,  just  south  of  the  Wyoming  line. 
Small  reservoirs  can  be  provided  on  the  tributaries  for  regulating  the  water  for  use 
in  Wyoming. 

The  question  has  been  studied  whether  or  not  the  storage  of  water  for  the  lower 
river  could  be  feasibly  and  properly  accomplished  in  the  upper  basin,  and  whether 
or  not  it' would  solve  the  problems  as  well  as  below. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  am  interested  in  that  phase  of  the  Colorado  River  problem,  and  I 
would  like  to  have  you  elaborate  on  it.  Prof.  G.  E.  P.  Smith,  an  irrigation  engineer 
connected  with  the  College  of  Agriculture  of  the  University  of  Arizona,  stated  not 
long  ago  that  in  his  opinion  the  quickest  way  to  regulate  the  floods  of  the  Colorado 
River  for  the  protection  of  the  Imperial  Valley  is  to  build  the  Flaming  Gorge  Reservoir 
and  to  utilize  the  Dewey  Reservoir  site  which  you  have  just  mentioned. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  hang  one  of  the  maps  which  I  brought 
with  me? 

I  wanted  this  map  [indicating]  because  it  shows  the  reservoir  sites  which  have  been 
investigated  in  the  basin.  They  are  marked  in  red  and  show  vividly.  The  map 
shows  that  there  are  possibilities  on  the  upper  tributaries  of  the  Colorado  River  for 
storage.  The  Flaming  Gorge  site,  which  I  mentioned,  is  in  southern  Wyoming,  the 
south  end  of  the  reservoir  being  just  south  of  the  Wyoming-Utah  line.  That  is  the  best 
site  and  is  a  very  feasible  site,  with  a  large  water  supply;  and  the  best  one  on  the 
Grand  River  for  the  purpose  of  regulating  the  water  is  at  the  Dewey  site  in  eastern 
Utah  near  the  Colorado  line. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Those  are  the  two  reservoirs  on  the  headwaters  that  Professor  Smith 
has  recommended.  He  said  that  there  would  be  no  engineering  difficulties,  nothing 
new  or  experimental  in  their  construction,  that  the  dams  would  not  be  any  larger 
than  the  Roosevelt  Dam  and  that  the  work  could  begin  right  away,  which  would  give 
protection  to  the  Imperial  Valley  in  a  much  less  period  of  time  than  to  wait  for  the 
construction  of  the  great  dam  at  Boulder  Canyon. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  am  well  acquainted  with  Professor  Smith,  and  he  is  a  very  able  and 
intelligent  gentleman  and  on  most  subjects  I  agree  with  him.  It  is  true  that  those 
two  reservoir  sites  have  been  thoroughly  tested,  the  foundation  has  been  explored 
and  they  are  both  feasible  and  relatively  reasonable  in  cost.  They  intercept  about 
three-fourths  of  the  flow  of  the  Colorado  River  and  approximately  one-fourth  of  the 
drainage  area. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Would  they  simply  be  used  as  storage  reservoirs  for  water  to 
be  used  lower  down  or  is  there  any  irrigation  project  in  that  locality? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Flaming  Gorge  could  be  used  on  lands  in  Utah  and  Colorado;  Dewey 
could  not.  The  Dewey  site  on  the  Grand  River  is  below  any  irrigable  lands  in  that 
basin  and  it  would  be  useful  only  for  regulating  the  river  through  and  below  the 
canyon. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Is  there  enough  water  in  tliis  water  basin  to  irrigate  all  the 
lands  to  which  water  could  be  applied  north  of  Bowlder  Canyon  and  still  have  sufficient 
to  take  care  of  the  lands  in  the  Imperial  Valley  and  adjacent  lands? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir;  if  you  confine  that  to  lands  which  can  be  feasibly  reached 
and  with  some  to  spare. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Then  why  are  there  objections  to  this  project  on  the  part  oi 
some  of  the  people  in  Colorado  and  elsewhere? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Well,  there  are  three  reasons  why  these  two  sites  do  not  solve  the  ques- 
tion that  I  speak  of.  In  the  first  place,  they  have  not  adequate  capacity.  They  are 
smaller  than  is  necessary. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Where  is  the  Glen  Canyon? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  A  little  lower  down  there  you  will  find  the  dam  site,  in  northern 
Arizona. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  covers  a  very  large  territory,  does  it  not? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  The  reservoirs  spoken  of,  Flaming  Gorge  and  Dewey,  if  built, 
would  regulate  the  main  flow  of  the  water  in  a  manner  adequate  for  irrigation  and  for 
power  through  the  Boulder  Canyon  or  in  any  part  of  the  Grand  Canyon  region;  that  is, 
any  point  below  the  junction  of  the  Green  and  the  Grand  Rivers.  They  would  not, 
of  course,  intercept  all  of  the  water  and  would  not  make  as  large  a  quantity  available 
for  power,  but  would  make  available  a  sufficient  quantity  to  satisfy  irrigation  needs. 


24  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    I'.ASIX. 

The  Flaming  Gorge  Reservoir  is  the  most  valuable  and  promising  site  at  which  to 
develop  power  for  use  in  that  region  and  is  now  desired  for  the  development  of  power  for 
use  in  Salt  Lake  City  and  in  the  mining  regions  of  Utah.  If  it  were  built  for  irrigation 
or  flood-control  purposes,  in  the  lower  basin,  it  could  not,  of  course,  be  used  in  the 
method  necessary  for  the  development  of  power.  The  same  thing  is  true  of  its  use 
for  the  development  of  irrigation  in  the  upper  basin,  and  it  can  be  used  for  that  pur- 
pose, and  those  two  uses,  power  and  irrigation,  up  there,  are  so  antagonistic  to  the 
uses  of  the  valley  below,  for  which  it  would  be  confined  to  a  draft  of  about  three 
months,  and  that  at  a  different  part  of  the  year  from  what  it  would  be  used  above,  that 
the  use  of  reservoirs  in  either  of  those  places  for  the  benefit  of  the  valley  below  would 
destroy  large  resources  of  the  upper  States.  That  is  the  main  objection. 

The  other  objections  are  that  they  do  not  solve  the  problem.  While  they  intercept 
about  three-fourths  of  the  actual  flow  of  water,  it  is  the  regular  flow  from  the  mountains 
that  comes  to  them.  They  do  not  intercept  the  flashy  flood  flows  that  cause  the 
damage.  Three-fourths  of  the  basin  or  more  would  be  left  unintercepted  by  those 
two  reservoirs,  I  think  nearly  four-fifths,  and  all  of  it  is  subject  to  great  floods  and  a 
great  deal  of  it  to  heavy  flow  at  times  from  the  mountains,  so  that  the  floods  would  not 
be  regulated.  To  illustrate  the  importance  of  that,  I  wish  to  call  attention  to  the  fact 
that  the  Gila  River  in  southern  Arizona,  which  has  57,000  square  miles  of  drainage,  or 
about  22  per  cent  of  the  entire  drainage  of  the  Colorado  River,  discharges  only 
6  per  cent  of  the  water  of  that  basin,  but  it  furnishes  flood  waves  at  times  which  are  as 
great  as  the  maximum  flow  of  the  Colorado  River  itself  above  the  mouth  of  the  Gila. 
So  that  in  the  final  regulation  of  the  stream  at  Yuma  and  below,  it  will  be  necessary 
to  provide  a  dam  on  the  Gila.  The  Gila  floods,  however,  are  not  nearly  so  menacing 
to  the  Imperial  Valley  as  the  Colorado,  because  they  are  very  brief  and  although  th,ey 
might  break  the  levees  and  break  into  the  valley  they  are  over  in  time  to  allow  the 
break  to  be  repaired  at  low  water,  instead  of  continuing  for  months  at  a  high  water 
stage  like  the  Colorado  River  does. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  In  other  words,  the  flood  season  on  the  Gila  is  not  the  same  as  on  the 
Colorado. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  That  ie  true.  It  floods  in  the  winter  and  early  spring,  while  the  Colorado 
fleods  in  the  summer. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Let  me  see  if  I  understand  vou  correctly. 

Your  first  objection  to  the  construction  of  the  reservoirs  at  the  Flaming  Gorge  and 
Dewey  sites  is  that  if  they  were  used  for  the  purpose  of  regulating  the  floods  so  as  to 
protect  the  Imperial  Valley  the  release  of  the  water  would  have  to  be  made  at  such 
times  as  to  seriously  interfere  with  a  constant  market  for  power  in  Salt  Lake  or  Denver 
or  other  cities  and  towns  in  that  vicinity. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  It  would  destroy  their  use  for  power  purposes  almost. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  So  that  the  people  in  the  upper  section  of  the  Colorado  River  Basin 
who  are  interested  in  obtaining  power  feel  that  it  would  be  better  to  have  the  flood 
waters  stored  at  some  other  place  farther  downstream  and  allow  these  two  dams  to  be 
built  primarily  for  power  purposes. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  And  also  for  irrigation.  Flaming  Gorge  is  of  use  for  irrigation  and  could 
be  used  for  both  irrigation  and  power. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Your  second  objection  is  that  the  waters  entering  these  two  reservoirs 
largely  come  from  melting  snow  which  runs  off  slowly,  and  that  therefore  they  would 
not  control  the  flashy  floods  that  are  the  real  menace  to  the  Imperial  Valley. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Well,  there  is  a  great  deal  of  water  that  comes  at  high  times,  and  those 
reservoirs  would  contribute  to  the  control  of  the  damaging  floods,  but  they  leave 
more  than  three-fourths  of  that  basin  uncontrolled  and  on  the  maximum  floods  would 
have  but  little  influence,  for  two  reasons  —the  reservoirs  might  be  discharging  at  that 
time  as  their  capacity  is  not  great,  and  they  would  not  be  sufficient  to  hold  all  of  the 
water  in  the  basin  back,  either  one  of  them;  but  the  reasons  you  have  given  are  the 
principal  ones.  In  the  first  place  it  does  not  solve  the  flood  problem  and  in  the  second 
place  it  would  destroy  resources  in  the  upper  States  to  use  the  reservoirs  for  that 
purpose. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Have  you  any  suggestion  to  offer  as  to  what  additional  provisions 
should  be  made  to  meet  this  other  emergency?  Are  there  other  places  available? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir.  This  map  shows  that  there  are  two  reservoir  sites  on  the  main 
stream  of  large  capacity,  one  at  Glen  Canyon,  where  the  river  enters  Arizona,  and  one 
about  300  miles  farther  down  at  Boulder  Canyon,  where  the  river  forms  the  boundary 
between  Arizona  and  Nevada.  The  Boulder  Canyon  site  will  hold  a  little  more 
water  for  a  given  height  of  dam  than  the  Glen  Canyon  site.  It  is  also  below  and  inter- 
cepts about  50,000  square  miles  of  drainage  area  which  Glen  Canyon  does  not  inter- 
cept. It  is  also,  of  course,  much  nearer  to  the  necessary  market  for  power  on  the 
Pacific  coast. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  25 

The  report  recently  issued  discusses  this  question  briefly  and  recommends  the 
construction  of  the  reservoir  in  Boulder  Canyon.  Investigations  have  been  made  with 
that  in  view  and  are  still  in  progress.  We  have  found  one  good,  feasible  dam  site 
but  there  are  numerous  places  in  the  canyon  where  a  dam  can  be  built,  and  it  is  desir- 
able to  get  it  at  the  lowest  point  in  the  canyon  possible  so  as  to  utilize  whatever  fall 
is  available,  because  a  second  dam  in  the  same  canyon,  of  course,  would  not  be  a 
practical  proposition,  and  with  that  in  view  we  are  making  additional  investigations 
and  the  last  investigations  were  made  at  the  point  indicated  on  that  map  as  the  dam 
site  in  Black  Canyon. 

Mr.  UAYDEX.  Black  Canyon  is  just  below  Boulder  Canyon? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes;  it  is  simply  a  continuation  of  Boulder  Canyon. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  What  funds  have  you  available  to  continue  this  engineering  investi- 
gation? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  appropriation  bill  passed  for  the  Interior  Department  recently 
contains  an  item  of  §100,000  for  carrying  on  the  investigation  of  the  Colorado  River. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  It  is  your  purpose  to  use  such  funds  to  thoroughly  explore  every 
possible  site  in  Boulder  and  Black  Canyons  so  as  to  finally  determine  where  the  best 
location  is? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  And  the  farther  down  the  river  you  could  find  a  feasible  site  is  where 
you  would  locate  the  dam? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  think  so.  Of  course,  we  have  to  take  many  other  things  into  consid- 
eration— the  depth  to  rock  and  everything  of  that  kind — but,  other  things  being  equal, 
it  is  desirable  to  locate  it  as  far  down  the  stream  as  possible. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  You  have  mentioned  the  Glen  Canyon  Reservoir  site.  If  you  are  at 
all  familiar  with  the  discussion  that  has  been  going  on  in  the  Southwest,  you  are 
aware  that  the  construction  of  a  reservoir  at  Glen  Canyon,  near  Lee's  Ferry,  where, 
I  understand,  the  canyon  walls  are  some  1,300  feet  high — 

Mr.  DAVIS  (interposing).  So  they  are  at  Boulder. 

Mr.  HAYDEN  (continuing.)  The  plan  suggested  is  that  instead  of  building  an  ex- 
pensive stone  and  concrete  dam,  as  is  proposed  in  your  Boulder  Canyon  report,  to 
place  immense  charges  of  dynamite  in  the  upper  part  of  each  of  the  walls  of  Glen 
Canyon  and  blast  them  down  into  the  river  bed  so  as  to  make  a  great  rock-fill  dam. 
The  canyon,  as  I  understand  it,  makes  a  sharp  bend  there,  and  the  plan  would  be  to 
thus  build  this  rock-fill  dam  and  then  cut  through  the  bend  for  a  spillway  and  for 
power  development.  So  many  people  have  written  to  me  in  regard  to  the  Glen 
Canyon  Dam  that  I  shall  be  greatly  obliged  if  you  will  discuss  the  possibilities  there. 
Please  tell  us  what  investigations  the  Reclamation  Service  has  made,  and  whether  it 
is  possible  to  build  that  kind  of  a  dam  so  as  to  control  the  flood  waters  of  the  Colorado 
River.  If  you  could  blast  the  rock  into  the  Canyon  and  build  a  dam  in  that  way, 
obviously  it  would  be  very  much  cheaper  than  a  structure  made  of  stone  and  concrete. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  have  given  a  great  deal  of  consideration  to  that  question  and  have 
discussed  it.  The  first  proposition  I  ever  knew  for  doing  that  was  for  the  Boulder 
Canyon  Dam.  Our  engineers  have  studied  that  and  I  do  not  agree  it  would  be  cheaper 
to  do  it.  If  all  the  necessary  precautions  were  taken  to  make  that  dam  safe,  it  is  very 
doubtful  whether  it  would  be  cheaper.  It  is  so  unprecedented  in  its  attempt  that 
I  do  not  regard  it  as  wise  to  do  it.  It  is  not,  however,  beyond  consideration  at  the  pres- 
ent time  because  nothing  has  been  done  that  might  not  permit  that  type  of  dam  to 
be  built,  but  it  is  irrelevant  to  this  question  because  it  can  be  done  just  as  well  in 
Boulder  Canyon  as  it  can  in  Glen  Cauoa,  because  of  the  high  walls. 

Mr.  HAVDKN-.  If  the  scheme  of  blasting  rock  from  the  sides  of  the  canyon  is  feasible 
at  (Jlen  Canyon  it  is  just  as  practicable  at  Boulder  Canyon? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Certainly;  nobody  has  ever  mentioned  any  reason  why  it  would  not 
be,  and  we  considered  and  estimated  for  it  at  Boulder  Canyon  a  year  and  a  half  ago 
and  decided  upon  the  other  type  of  dam. 

Mr.  HAVDKN.  What  was  the  principal  engineering  reason  which  led  you  to  that 
decision? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Safety. 

Mr.  HAYDEV.  In  other  words,  you  believe  that  a  dam  of  that  kind  would  not  stay 
in  the  river  after  the  rock  is  blasted  in. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Ye.s.  A  paper  advocating  that  type  of  dam  has  been  published  in  the 
proceedings  of  the  American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers,  and  I  have  sent  my  views  on 
that  subject  to  that  society  for  publication,  and  they  will  appear  in  the  next  issue  of 
the  proceedings,  I  think.  Of  course,  it  is  a  technical  question  and  others  are  discussing 
the  matter,  and  it  would  hardly  be  profitable,  I  think,  to  undertake  that  discussion 
now  because,  for  one  thing,  both  sides  are  not  represented  here,  and  it  is  a  \  cry  tech- 
nical question  and  it  would  take  a  day  or  two  to  discuss  it. 


26  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  What  investigations  have  been  made  at  Glen  Canyon  to  determine  the 
depth  to  bedrock. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  None. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  Have  you  any  funds  available  to  make  such  an  investigation? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Our- present  appropriation  would  be  available  for  that  purpose,  as  1 
interpret  it.  ^ 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  If  it  is  available,  would  it  be  adequate  to  do  that  work?  y 

Mr.  DAVIS.  No,  it  would  not,  unless  we  neglected  other  work. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  You  have  $100,000  available  that  could  be  expended  anywhere  on  the 
Colorado  River. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Anywhere  in  the  basin:   yes. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  As  I  stated  before,  there  has  been  such  great  interest  shown  in  the 
Glen  Canyon  dam  site  that  if  funds  are  available  it  would  seem  to  me  to  be  highly 
desirable  to  take  a  diamond  drill  and  find  out  how  far  it  is  to  bedrock  there,  as  one 
element  that  would  determine  its  feasibility. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  exploration  would  be  very  expensive,  because  it  is  a  long  way 
from  the  railroad  and  from  supplies' of  any  kind,  and  it  would  be  very  expensive  to 
bring  in  the  machinery"  and  to  get  the  men  there  and  would  require  a  large  appropria- 
tion. I  suppose  that  is  the  reason  it  has  not  been  done  before,  because  the  power 
companies  have  considered  it  and  abandoned  it.  A  survey  of  the  Glen  Canyon  site 
was  made  by  the  Geological  Survey,  but  the  Reclamation  Service  has  made  no  in- 
vestigation of  that  site  on  the  ground,  but  it  has  been  listed  and  its  capacity  known 
for  years  and  has  been  included  in  our  list  of  possible  reservoir  sites.  It.  however, 
leaves  50,000  square  miles  of  drainage  above  the  Boulder  Canyon  site  unintercepted. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  That  would  be  the  drainage  from  the  Virgin  and  the  Little  Colorado? 

Mr.  DAMS.  The  Little  Colorado,  the  Paria.  the  Virgin.  Grand  Wash,  Kanab  Creek, 
Diamond  Creek,  and  many  other  tributaries. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  Would  the  construction  of  either  one  of  the  proposed  dams  have 
any  deleterious  effect  on  the  Grand  Canyon  National  Park? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Xo:  neither  one  would  have  any  effect  on  it  at  all,  because  they  are 
both  remote  from  that  park.  Glen  Canyon  is  a  long  distance  above  the  park.  As 
you  will  see,  the  park  is  colored  there  in  purple.  The  Boulder  Canyon  is  a  long 
distance  below  it. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  Perhaps  150  miles. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  There  are  two  good  power  sites  which  should  be  developed 
between  Boulder  Canyon  and  the  Grand  Canyon  Park  that  would  not  interfere  with 
it  at  all,  and  there  is  one  good  one  between  Glen  Canyon  and  the  Grand  Canyon  Park 
that  would  not  touch  it  at  all. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  You  have  reference  to  the  Diamond  Creek  power  site? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Diamond  Creek  is  one  and  then  there  is  room  for  another  between 
that  and  Boulder  Canyon. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  If  the  application  made  by  James  B.  Girand,  of  Phoenix,  for  the 
Diamond  Creek  site,  now  pending  before  the  Federal  Power  Commission  was  allowed, 
would  it  in  any  engineering  way  interfere  with  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canvon 
Dam? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  No. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  understand  the  Federal  Power  Commission  has  determined  not  to 
grant  any  water  power  applications  on  the  stream  pending  action  by  the  Colorado 
River  Commission  looking  to  an  equitable  distribution  of  its  waters  between  the 
seven  States  interested.  Also  that  no  applications  will  be  approved  pending  the 
determination  of  the  question  as  to  whether  the  granting  of  any  such  applications 
would  interfere  with  any  Government  dams.  Has  there  been  any  especial  objection 
made  to  granting  the  Girand  application  by  reason  of  any  interference  in  any  way 
with  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Xo;  in  a  physical  sense  it  would  not  interfere  at  all. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  The  only  possible  interference,  then,  would  be  that  the  development 
of  power  at  Diamond  Creek  would  supply  a  market  for  power  which  otherwise  might 
be  supplied  from  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam. 

Mr.  DAVIS-.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  The  people  in  my  State.  I  will  say  very  frankly  to  the  committee,  are 
immensely  interested  in  the  possibilities  of  the  development  of  power  on  the  Colorado 
River.     We  have  no  oil  field  of  any  kind  in  Arizona  and  no  large  coal  field  has  been 
developed.     We  are  compelled  to  import  all  of  our  fuel  oil  either  from  California  or 
Texas  and  our  coal  from  Colorado  or  Xew  Mexico.     The  mining  industry  in  Arizona        s~ 
is  operating  under  high  costs  with  tremendous  charges  for  transportation  to  move  out       * 
the  copper.     If  hydroelectric  power  is  produced  on  the  Colorado  River,  the  mines  of 
Arizona  will  be  immediate  consumers  of  large  quantities  of  it. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  27 

A  secondary  market  for  this  power,  which  I  believe  will  in  time  be  very  great, 
would  be  the  use  of  electric  power  to  develop  water  by  pumping  for  the  irrigation 
of  lands  within  the  State.  The  area  of  land  that  can  be  irrigated  in  Arizona  by  gravity 
is  less  than  in  California,  as  Director  Davis  has  stated.  Therefore,  the  people  of  Ari- 
zona have  an  immediate  interest  in  the  power  question.  They  are  anxious  to  have 
cheap  power  made  available  as  soon  as  possible. 

Mr.  SWING.  Mr.  Chairman,  may  I  ask  a  question? 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Yes. 

Mr.  SWING.  As  I  understand  it.  there  are  no  flood -control  possibilities  to  speak  of  in 
connection  with  the  proposed  Diamond  Creek  dam. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  No;  the  entire  canyon  between  the  two  sites  is  a  narrow  canyon  with 
practically  no  storage  capacity. 

Mr.  SWING.  It  is  virtually  a  pure  power  proposition. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Purely. 

Mr.  SWING.  Now,  if  Diamond  Creek  dam  was  built  and  then  we  built  Boulder 
Canyon  dam,  so  far  as  you  can  see  now  or  in  the  near  future,  is  there  a  market  for 
the  power  from  both  dams? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Well,  that  is  looking  into  the  fxiture  in  a  way  that  none  of  xis  is  entirely 
competent  to  do. 

Mr.  SWING.   The  market  is  not  sufficient  for  both  dams  now. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  That  is  true. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Mr.  Davis,  if  the  Government  is  going  in  there  to  build  the  Boulder 
Canyon  dam  or  the  Glen  Canyon  dam  with  the  power  possibilities  of  both,  would 
it  be  wise  to  permit  private  individuals  to  go  in  there  in  advance  and  develop  power 
plants  while  the  Government  was  proceeding  to  develop  the  whole  project? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  think  not.  That  brings  me  to  a  question  that  I  was  intending  to  touch 
upon.  The  first  section  of  this  bill  declares  a  policy  on  the  part  of  the  Government. 
The  interrelation  of  the  power  possibilities  and  of  the  control  of  floods  and  of  irriga- 
tion on  that  river  are  so  intimate  that  any  conflict  of  authority  is  bound  to  lead  to 
waste  and  maybe  danger. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Not  only  that,  but  what  is  in  my  mind  is  that  if  we  sre  starting  in  to 
develop  that  whole  country,  if  we  allow  private  individuals  in  the  meantime  to  take 
up  the  choice  sites  and  in  addition  to  that  take  the  market,  are  not  Congress  and  the 
people  going  to  hestitate  a  good  deal  about  making  the  general  development? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  think  so;  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  In  your  opinion,  if  Congress  was  to  take  the  necessary  steps  to  author- 
ize you  to  commence  construction  at  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  site,  do  you  believe  that 
you_  would  have  power  available  for  the  State  of  Arizona  as  quickly  as  it  would  be 
available  if  it  were  developed  by  private  enterprise  at  some  other  site? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  think  we  could.  There  are  some  advantages  in  each  case  and  it  is  a 
close  question.  It  might  take  a  little  longer  at  Boulder  Canyon  or  it  might  take  a 
little  longer  at  Diamond  Creek.  The  opportunities  for  diverting  the  river  and  making 
it  safe  to  work  in  are  better,  in  my  judgment,  at  Boulder  Canyon  than  they  are  at 
Diamond  Creek.  The  Diamond  Creek  site,  though,  is  an  excellent  one  for  power 
and  some  day  ought  to  be  developed. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Let  me  ask  you  this  question,  Mr.  Davis:  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  in  the 
construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  or  the  Glen  Canyon  dam,  if  there  are 
intermediate  places  where  you  could  develop  electric  energy,  that  ought  to  be  done 
by  the  Government  first,  so  as  to  have  that  power  for  use  in  the  construction  of  either 
one  of  the  dams? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  If  it  could  be  done  cheaper,  that  is  true,  but  any  dam  that  it  i<?  wise 
to  put  into  the  Colorado  River  has  got  to  be  a  high  dam.  The  foundation  conditions 
and  the  flood  conditions  are  too  strenuous  there  to  permit  a  small  dam  that  would  be 
safe,  and  I  do  not  see  any  very  great  difference  between  the  time  and  cost  of  building 
a  dam  of  a  sriven  height  in  any  good  site  in  that  canyon.  Some  of  them  are  a  little 
less  accessible  than  others.  The  one  at  Glen  Canyon  ig  very  inaccessible.  It  is  130 
miles  from  the  railroad  and  that,  of  course,  would  handicap  it.  The  Diamond  Creek 
site  and  the  Boulder  Canyon  site  are  both  relatively  close  to  the  railroad  and  that 
would  be  in  their  favor. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  How  far  is  the  Boulder  Canyon  from  the  railroad? 

M  r.  DAVIS.  It  is  about  30  miles  on  a  straight  line  and  38  miles  by  the  way  the  wagon 
road  goes;  that  is,  the  dam  site  that  I  am  speaking  of.  The  Glen  Canyon  site  is  about 
100  miles  farther.  The  Diamond  Creek  site  is  a  little  closer  to  the  railroad. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  I  have  in  mind  is  that  in  the  construction  of  many  of  these  plants 
they  construct  a  small  plant  to  use  in  building  the  large  one.  Now,  if  it  was  possible 
to  build,  at  reasonable  cost,  a  dam  or  any  other  structure  that  would  develop  electric 
energy  which  could  be  used  in  constructing  the  dam,  you  would  have  that  power  to 
supply  to  the  people  in  the  various  States  that  are  near  by. 


28  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  We  have  tentative  plans,  not  included  in  this  report,  looking  to 
the  early  development  of  power  for  use  at  that  dam  and  for  any  other  use,  of  course, 
that  can  be  made  of  it  at  Boulder  <  'an yon.  We  have  got  to  divert  the  river  in  order 
to  unwater  the  foundation.  Tunnels  are  made  for  that  diversion.  There  will  have 
to  be  more  than  one,  and  probably  three,  on  account  of  the  volume.  As  soon  as  the 
dam  is  built  high  enough,  so  that  there  is  any  considerable  head,  one  of  these  tunnels 
can  be  closed  and  machinery  installed  in  it.  ) 

Mr.  LITTLE.  I  beg  your  pardon,  but  you  say  that  you  will  have  to  divert  the  river 
in  order  to  do  something — 

Mr.  DAVIS  (interposing).  For  unwatering  the  foundation. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  are  going  to  make  a  tunnel,  and  then  after  you  get  the  tunnel 
you  will  have  to  iill  up  the  tunnel  again? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  We  might.  Those  tunnels  might  be  used  later,  and  I  think  they 
would. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  You  say  for  unwatering  it? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes;  dry-ing  it  up.  We  have  got  to  excavate  the  river  without  the 
water  in  it.  It  is  entirely  feasible  and  convenient  to  use  one  of  those  tunnels  after 
the  dam  is  up  high  enough  to  give  head  enough  for  the  purpose,  to  install  machinery 
there  and  develop  power  which  will  be  used  in  the  construction  of  the  main  dam. 
That  first  dam  will  be  built  to  a  certain  height,  which  is  described  in  this  report,  on 
the  foundation  that  it  would  require  for  itself  only,  so  as  to  get  that  up  as  quickly  as 
possible  and  get  away  from  the  menace  of  floods.  That  dam  would  be  high  enough 
to  store  the  floods  to  some  extent  and  divert  them  through  the  tunnel  without  danger 
of  its  overwhelming  the  work,  and  then  the  excavation  below  would  be  finished  and 
the  large  dam  completed.  The  first  dam  would  be  relatively  small,  but  it  would 
furnish  a  head  for  the  power  plant  in  the  tunnel,  just  what  Judge  Raker  has  described, 
a  small  plant  that  would  develop  power  for  use  on  the  large  dam,  and  of  course  would 
fit  in  very  well  with  the  cheapest  construction  of  the  dam,  and  I  do  not  know  of  any 
reason  why  that  can  not  be  done  as  quickly  and  as  well  at  Boulder  Canyon  as  at  any 
other  place  in  the  canyon. 

Mr.  RAKER.  If  there  were  enough  power  developed  there,  in  addition  to  the  power 
for  use  of  the  plant,  would  that  permit  of  the  excess  power  being  distributed  and  used 
by  the  mines  in  the  valley  to  which  Mr.  Hayden  has  referred? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Certainly,  and  that  would  be  a  necessary  and  a  very  wise  part  of  the 
development,  because  when  the  dam  is  completed  we  need  transmission  lines  and  all 
the  appurtenances,  and  they  can  be  just  as  well  put  in  to  carry  that  preliminary 
power,  and  used  afterwards  for  the  permanent  transmission  of  power. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So  the  development  by  and  for  the  Government,  as  you  have  des- 
cribed it,  would  not  only  help  toward  the  building  of  the  dam  but  would  commence  to 
develop  this  territory  where  the  private  individuals  are  now  seeking  rights  for  building 
dams  to  establish  hydroelectric  plants? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir;  and  the  only  physical  difference  in  the  time  required  is  the 
availability  of  funds.  If  they  can  get  the  money  quicker  than  we  can,  then  they  can 
build  it  quicker.  If  they  can  not,  then  they  can  not  build  it  any  quicker. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  are  not  satisfied  they  could  do  it  any  better? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Xo.  The  local  conditions  are  such  that  it  is  desirable  to  put  that  plant 
in  for  the  construction  of  the  dam  itself,  if  for  no  other  reason,  because  it  is  a  very  large 
work,  over  3,000,000  cubic  yards  of  masonry,  and  a  large  amount  of  excavation,  which 
requires,  as  everybody  knows,  a  very  large  quantity  of  power,  and  to  develop  that 
power  on  the  ground  is  the  cheapest  way  of  getting  it. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  I  understand  there  is  an  immediate  market  in  Arizona  to-day  lor  at 
least  100,000  horsepower.  The  copper  mines  would  substitute  hydroelectric  power  for 
the  power  now  generated  by  oil  and  coal. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  That  market  for  mining  purposes  in  Arizona  is  one  of  the  outstanding 
features  of  this  proposition.  The  mines  of  Arizona  can  not  be  properly  developed 
without  it,  and  it  is  bound  to  come  sometime,  and  the  sooner  it  conies  the  sooner  that 
development  will  come,  and  in  that  development,  Arizona  being  the  leading  copper 
State  and  very  important  in  gold  and  silver  and  other  products,  the  entire  country  is 
interested. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  would  suggest  that  you  leave  out  the  word  ''one.  "  Arizona,  is  the 
leading  copper  State. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  will  be  glad  to  dp  that.     I  know  it  has  been  the  leading  State. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  The  statistics  will  show  that  Arizona  produces  more  copper  than  any 
other  State  in  the  Union.  .- 

Mr.  RAKER.  As  to  the  original  cost  to  start  the  plant,  which  is  the  cheaper  place?     ( 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  cost  of  starting? 

Mr.  RAKER.  Yes. 


DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER   BASIX.  29 

Mr.  DAVIS.  In  cost  I  do  not  think  there  is  very  much  difference.  I  do  not  know 
why  there  should  be  any.  Both  will  require  a  railroad.  There  are  a  few  miles 
more  of  railroad  to  Bpulder  Canyon  necessary  but  not  enough  to  make  much  differ- 
ence. The  Diamond  Creek  site  is  difficult  to  reach  right  in  the  canyon  but  very 
accessible  to  a  point  not  far  from  the  site.  There  is  very  little  difference  in  the 
length  of  time  that  would  be  required.  The  advantage,  I  think,  would  be  some- 
what with  Boulder  Canyon,  if  it  *vere  planned  to  build  a  big  dam,  because  wo  would 
put  in  a  large  plant  and  could  work  faster.  The  present  plans  for  the  Diamond 
Creek  development  do  not  call  for  nearly  as  high  a  dam  as  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam. 

Mr.  SWING.  As  compared  with  Glen  Canyon,  on  which  no  investigation  has  been 
made  and  which  is  100  miles  farther  away  from  the  railroad,  which  dam,  Boulder 
or  Glen  Canyon,  could  be  built  sooner? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  Boulder  Canyon  could  be  built  much  sooner.  We  are  a  year 
further  ahead  on  the  investigation  and  there  would  be  pretty  nearly  a  year  longer 
required  to  make  Glen  Canyon  accessible  for  starting  the  work  and  getting  in  the 
equipment,  and  then  when  you  got  that  you  would  have  a  large  possibility  of  power 
too  far  from  the  market  to  market  it.  It  is  264  miles  farther  from  the  Pacific  coast 
than  the  Boulder  Canyon  site,  by  transmission  line. 

Mr.  RAKER.  With  the  dam  site  and  with  the  height  of  dam  you  contemplate,  your 
statement  is  that  it  would  practically  hold  back  all  of  the  flood  waters? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  most  important  stream  coming  in  below  Boulder  Canyon  is  the  Gila. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  know  the  Gila  is  below,  but  I  am  speaking  of  the  Colorado.  It  would 
be  sufficient  to  control  practically  all  the  flood  waters  of  the  Colorado? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  sir:  and  it  is  the  only  site  where  that  can  be  done. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  Mr.  Davis,  what  is  the  magnitude  of  that  proposed  dam? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Of  course,  there  are  some  details  of  that  kind  that  our  investigation  may 
influence  later,  but  about  600  feet  in  height. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  What  would  be  the  width  at  the  bottom  and  at  the  top? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  width  at  the  river  level  is  about  340  feet  at  the  site  that  seems  most 
promising  in  the  Boulder  Canyon,  and  the  width  at  the  top  is  about  1,200  feet. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Mr.  Davis,  what  is  the  approximate  cost  of  completing  the  Boulder 
Canyon  dam  and  installing  the  electric  plant  there?  What  is  the  estimate  you  have 
now? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  dam  itself,  by  the  best  estimate  we  have  at  present  and  at  the  height 
I  spoke  of.  would  be  about  $48.000,000.  The  development  of  power  would  be  more 
gradual.  If  we  are  going  to  build  transmission  lines,  of  course  that  depends  on  where 
you  build  the  line  and  what  kind  of  line  you  build,  but  the  development  of  practically 
all  of  the  firm  power  that  this  site  would  furnish  would  cost  just  about  as  much  as  the 
dam  or  perhaps  a  little  less. 

Mr.  RAKER.  If  the  Government  appropriates  the  $48,000.000  and  the  other  a  n  .11. .la 
necessary  to  build  the  ditch  to  extend  the  transmission  line,  what  method  and  mean.-* 
and  from  what  source  are  you  going  to  get  the  money  back  to  pay  the  Government, 
for  This  money  expended? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  lease  of  the  power  privileges  is  ample  to  cover  the  cost  and  pay 
interest  on  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  about  the  use  of  the  water?  Would  there  be  anything  from 
that? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  think  it  would  be  difficult  to  make  any  charge  for  the  use  of  the  water 
because  it  would  be  practically  impossible  to  withhold  its  benefits.  Of  course,  a 
charge  could  be  made  on  lands  not  yet  opened,  if  Congress  so  ordered,  but  the  develop- 
ments from  the  Colorado  River  that  are  feasible  are  so  difficult  that  no  very  large 
charge  of  that  kind  could  be  stood  by  the  average  settler. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  In  your  opinion  the  construction  of  the  necessary  diversion  dams 
and  canals  in  order  to  get  the  water  out  of  the  river,  after  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  is 
built,  would  amount  to  practically  all  reclamation  charge  that  the  land  could  stand? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Nearly  so.  in  many  cases. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  The  reason  I  asked  that  question  is  this:  Arizona,  being  interested 
in  power  and  anxious  to  obtain  it  as  cheap  as  possible,  if  a  part  of  the  cost  of  the  Boul- 
der Canyon  dam  could  be  charged  to  the  irrigable  land  benefited,  that  amount  of  the 
cost  would  be  taken  off  of  the  sum  necessary  to  collect  from  the  sale  of  power? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  In  other  words,  the  plan  you  have  proposal  is  to  recover  the  entile 
cost  of  the  dam  out  of  power  sales  and  reimburse  the  Government  in  that  way.  If  the 
cost  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  is  reduced  by  the  amount  that  might  be  fairly  appor- 
tioned to  the  irrigated  lands,  the  power  sharge  would  be  correspondingly  reduced? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  Would  not  the  charge  for  power  be  based  upon  the  value  of  the 
power  furnished?  You  would  not  cut  that  down  50  per  cent  because  you  were  able 
to  shift  part  of  the  cost  of  construction  over  onto  the  land,  would  you? 


30  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN. 

Mr.  HAYDENT.  The  theory,  as  I  understand  it,  is  that  in  building  this  dam  Congress 
should  confer  the  widest  possible  public  benefit.  There  are  three  benefits  to  be  con- 
ferred: First  and  primarily,  asset  out  in  the  report  made  by  Mr. 'Davis,  the  relief  of  the 
Imperial  Valley  from  possibility  of  destruction  by  flood;  second,  if  stated  in  this  order, 
the  conservation  of  the  water  for  purposes  of  irrigation;  and,  third,  for  the  develop- 
ment of  hydroelectric  power. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  When  you  commence  selling  that  power  and  regulating  the  price    y 
of  it  in  the  way  you  indicated,  I  think  you  open  up  a  A-ery  different  problem. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  irrigator  under  a  reclamation  project  is  entitled 
to  receive  his  water  as  cheaply  as  it  can  be  served  to  him.  I  think  that  is  in  the 
public  interest.  It  would  also  be  in  the  public  interest  for  the  United  States  to  sell 
this  power  as  cheaply  as  it  could  be  sold  and  still  reimburse  the  Government  within 
a  period  of  years.  The  cheaper  the  power  the  greater  the  stimulation  to  the  mining 
and  every  other  industry  in  the  entire  territory  tributary  to  the  power  development. 
There  can  be  no  question  but  what  cheap  coal  or  cheap  oil  builds  up  industrial  com- 
munities and  cheap  hydroelectric  power  will  do  the  same  thing.  The  Government 
should  not  seek  to  obtain  a  greater  revenue  out  of  the  development  of  power  on 
the  Colorado  River  over  and  above  the  amount  necessary  to  recoup  itself. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  Without  wishing  to  interrupt  further,  my  point  is  that  it  would  not 
be  proper  to  shift  the  cost  of  construction  over  to  the  land,  up  to  the  highest  point 
that  it  could  possibly  carry,  in  order  to  sell  power  for  less  than  it  was  actually  worth. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  have  no  such  idea  in  mind. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Mr.  Davis,  in  that  connection,  if  we  start  out  on  the  theory  that  this 
is  entirely  for  power  and  that  the  power  will  repay  the  cost  of  construction  and  the 
maintenance  and  interest,  and  it  will  also  irrigate  2,000,000  acres  of  land,  and  the 
2,000,000  acres  of  land  would  not  pay  anything  for  the  benefits  they  received,  we  can 
not  talk  very  hard  or  very  long  on  the  question  of  irrigation  and  the  prevention  of 
flood,  unless  they  pay  a  reasonable  proportion  of  the  cost  for  the  benefit  they  receive; 
is  not  that  right? 

The  irrigation  resources  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  are  limited.  There  is  less 
land  that  can  be  reached  within  feasible  cost  than  there  is  water  for.  We  should 
ultimately  equalize  that  river  for  power  purposes,  if  for  no  other,  and  we  could  use 
it  all  in  irrigation  if  the  land  was  available. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  I  meant  was  that  we  should  not  give  preference  to  either,  but 
if  there  is  a  benefit  to  irrigation  and  flood  control,  they  should  meet  some  of  the  cost 
that  brings  about  that  condition. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  trouble  is  that  we  are  talking  about  a  man  who  is  not  there,  and  there 
is  no  way  you  can  make  him  meet  it.  He  will  not  meet  it  unless  he  chooses,  and  if 
you  make  the  price  too  high,  he  will  not  choose  to  meet  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  do  not  mean  to  make  it  too  high. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  That  is  the  point.  That  is  what  stops  development  and  that  is  where 
the  limit  is. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  thought  we  were  figuring  on  the  matter  of  flood  control  and  irrigation. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  if  we  thus  benefit  this  2,000,000  acres  of  land,  they  should  stand 
for  a  reasonable  proportion  of  the  cost. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  While  I  have  not  figured  it  out  in  detail.  I  will  venture  that  if  you  put 
enough  of  the  price  of  the  dam  upon  the  land  that  is  to  be  benefited  by  flood  control 
and  irrigation  to  make  a  difference  of  1  mill  per  kilowatt  hour  in  the  price  of  that 
power,  it  would  be  prohibitive  on  most  of  that  land. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  In  your  opinion  the  power  resource  is  so  great  that  there  is  no  ques- 
tion about  the  ability  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  project  both  to  produce  power  and  then 
to  sell  it  at  a  comparatively  low  price  which  will  be  sufficient  to  fully  reimburse  the 
Government  for  the  cost  of  the  dam? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes;  that  is  the  fact,  and  the  cost  of  the  dam  itself  is  only  a  fraction  of 
the  cost  of  that  power  delivered  to  the  user.  In  the  first  place,  the  installation  of 
the  machinery  is  about  as  great  in  cost  as  the  cost  of  the  dam.  The  cost  of  the  trans- 
mission for  distant  points  would  be  nearly  as  great,  and  the  cost  of  the  motors  and  the 
upkeep  of  the  transmission  lines  and  their  operation  is  expensive,  and  all  those  things 
taken  together  make  the  cost  of  the  dam.  so  far  a?  it  might  be  saddled  onto  irrigation 
or  anything  else,  relatively  trivial. 

The  proposed  plan  for  paying  for  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  from  power  receipts  is 
not  only  the  most  practical  but  is  the  most  just.     This  is  illustrated  by  the  operations 
of  the  reclamation  act.     For  example,  in  Salt  River  Valley  we  have  constructed  a  s 
project  at  a  cost  of  about  $11,000,000,  all  of  which  must  be  paid  back  by  the  farms  ( 
which  receive  the  irrigation  water.     The  city  of  Phoenix,  which  pays  nothing  to  the 
Government  for  this  work,  is  the  greatest  beneficiary  of  the  project,  and  has  in  fact 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX.  31 

received  benefit?  due  to  this  construction  far  in  excess  of  the  entire  cost  of  the  project; 
but  there  is  no  method  under  existing  law  by  which  these  benefits  can  be  collected. 
The  cost  must  all  be  carried  by  the  farmer  or  bv  the  Government.  This  is  unjust. 

The  construction  of  a  large  reservoir  in  Boulder  Canyon  will  provide  flood  control, 
making  safe  the  districts  below  which  are  now  threatened  by  the  floods  of  the  Colo- 
rado. It  will  regulate  the  river  so  as  to  provide  irrigation  for  a  large  additional  acreage 
of  land.  It  will  furnish  cheap  po\ver  for  the  mines  of  Arizona  and  Xevada.  All 
these  direct  benefits  will  build  up  the  country  that  is  tributary  to  Los  Angeles,  San 
Diego,  Prescott,  Phoenix,  and  the  other  cities  of  California  and  Arizona.  There  is 
no  way  of  collecting  from  those  cities  anv  portion  of  the  cost  except  through  the  sale 
of  power.  Under  the  plan  proposed  this  does  furnish  a  means  by  which  the  cities 
indirectly  benefited  by  the  development  will  pay  a  small  portion  of  the  cost  of  that 
development.  They  have  the  ability  to  pay  and  justice  demands  they  should  pay 
something  for  the  great  benefits  conferred  in  the  stimulation  of  their  tributary  ter- 
ritory. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  Mr.  Davis,  are  all  of  these  projects  below  this  proposed  dam  site. 
the  Yuma  project  and  the  Imperial  Valley  project.  Federal  projects? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Xo.  sir;  the  Imperial  Valley  was  not  irrigated  by  the  Government. 
The  Imperial  Valley  is  a  district  organization. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  As  I  understood  from  Judge  Swing  yesterday,  by  reason  of  putting 
in  this  dam  you  would  irrigate  about  400,000  acres  of  land  on  this  side,  additional  to 
what  is  being  irrigated  now  in  the  Imperial  Valley? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  Would  you  propose  to  furnish  the  water  users  or  the  landowners 
water  free  from  this  project? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Xo.     I  would  not  charge  any  of  this  dam  to  them,  but  they  could  not 
get  water  free. 
•    -Mr.  HUDSPETH.  That  point  was  not  clear  in  my  mind. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  In  order  to  reach  that  land,  we  will  have  to  build  another  structure, 
which  is  recommended  in  this  report,  a  main  high-line  canal  to  cost  $30,000,000. 
The  rest  of  the  system  would  cost  a  great  deal,  top. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  What  would  they  pay  for  this  additional  water  that  would  flow 
from  this  dam? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Nothing.  They  would  pay  for  the  works  necessary  to  use  that  water, 
and  according  to  my  plan  would  contribute  nothing  to  the  res3rvoir  itself. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  But  they  would  pay  additional  money  to  the  Government? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Oh,  yes. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  For  this  additional  benefit? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  You  would  charge  to  the  Imperial  Valley  its  proportionate  share  of 
the  cost  of  the  all- American  canal  and  you  would  charge  to  the  additional  area  that 
can  be  irrigated  on  the  mesa  above  Imperial  Valley  its  share  of  the  cost  of  that  canal 
and  the  lateral  ditches  that  may  be  necessary.  If  an  appropriation  were  made  by 
Congress  or  the  funds  provided  by  any  other  means,  the  lands  benefited  would  be 
fully  charged  for  the  whole  cost  of  that,  development? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  And  you  think  that  that  cost  would  be  about  all  the  land  could  stand 
without  adding  any  part  of  the  cost  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  sir.  One  of  our  very  serious  problems  was  to  determine  whether 
or  not  the  mesa  lands,  which  are  very  sandy,  were  of  such  character  that  a  poor  settler, 
the  only  kind  we  could  get.  would  go  on  there  and  with  the  charge  make  good. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Outside  of  the  cost  of  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam, 
the  subdam  you  spoke  of  and  the  canal  would  cost  about  $30.000,000? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Just  the  main  canal. 

Mr.  RAKER.  The  main  canal  and  the  subdam  there?  . 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  dam  is  already  there. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  said  there  would  have  to  be  other  appliances. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  mean  the  whole  distribution  system. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  would  cost  about  $30,000,000? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Xo:  the  main  canal  would  cost  about  $30,000,000. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  would  cover  the  present  Government  land  there  of  about  400,000 
acres? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  There  is  not  that  much  Government  land.  There  is  about  100,000 
a^res  additional,  of  which  less  than  half  is  public  land.  At  your  left .  Mr.  <  luiinnan.  is 
a  package  of  pamphlets  which  go  into  this  subject  \vhich  has  now  been  broached  and 
which  I  would  like  to  have  passed  ar.mnd  to  the  members  of  the  committee.  It  is 
a  report  of  the  board  of  engineers  constituted  for  that  purpose  on  the  all-Americun 
canal,  which  was  made  about  two  years  ago. 

131G— 22— PT  1 3 


32  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

Mr.  RAKER.  The  Government  land  and  all  the  private  land  now  under  irrigation 
and  all  that  would  be  benefited  by  this  all-American  canal,  costing  about  s:. 0.000.000, 
would  have  apportioned  or  allocated  to  it  that  charge. 

Mr.  DAVIS.   All  the  lands  benefited:  yes.  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So  there  would  be  no  one  getting  benefit  without  paying  in  proportion 
to  the  benefit  they  obtained? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  That  is  true. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  That  would  also  be  true  as  to  the  proposed  irrigation  project  on  the 
Colorado  River  Indian  Reservation  in  Arizona,  which  has  been  investigated  by  the 
Indian  Sendee? 

Mr.  DAVIS.   Yes.  sir:  that  is  the  plan. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  If  a  diversion  dam  v  ere  built  at  Headgate  Rock  with  canal?  and 
laterals  and  levees  and  other  necessary  structures  to  reclaim  100,000  acres  of  land  near 
Parker,  it  is  vour  idea  that  all  the  cost  of  that  project,  as  I  have  outlined  it.  would  be 
charged  to  the  land  benefited,  but  that  any  stored  water  that  came  down  from  the 
Boulder  Canyon  Dam  would  be  free  of  c< 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  And  the  same  would  be  true  of  any  development  in  the  Mohave 
Valley  made  possible  by  building  a  dam  at  Bulls  Head  Rock? 

Mr:  DAVIS.   Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  The  question  has  been  asked  of  me  by  a  constituent  of  mine  as  to 
why  it  is  necessary  to  specify  the  All-American  canal,  which  is  designed  to  care  for 
lands  in  California,  when  no  mention  is  made  in  the  bill  of  the  Colorado  River  Indian 
Reservation  project  and  the  Mohave  Valley  project  in  Arizona? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  They  are  mentioned  in  the  bill  in  the  general  language,  but  the  reason 
stress  is  laid  upon  the  All-American  canal  and  other  things  and  an  appropriation 
asked,  is  that  it  complies  \uth  the  act  of  Congress  which  was  entitled.  "An  act  to 
provide  for  an  examination  and  report  on  the  condition  and  possible  irrigation  develop- 
ment of  the  Imperial  Valley  in  California.''  That  is  the  title  of  the  act  under  which 
we  made  this  report,  and  these  other  subjects  are  so  related  to  the  whole  Colorado 
River  that,  of  course,  they  come  in  and  were  discussed  and  this  bill  provides  means 
by  which  those  canals  can  be  built. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  It  is  your  contention  that,  whether  the  Arizona  irrigation  projects 
are  specifically  mentioned  or  not,  if  the  bill  as  written  were  to  become  a  law  the  Re- 
clamation Service  coula  then  undertake  the  reclamation  of  all  the  irrigable  land  below 
Boulder  Canyon  within  the  United  States? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  think  that  is  correct,  as  fast  as  funds  are  provided. 

Mr.  RAKEF.  In  other  words,  Mr.  Davis,  the  cost  of  the  constru'ction  of  the  Boulder 
Canyon  dam  and  its  maintenance  and  the  cost  of  all  transmission  lines  connected  with 
it  would  depend  upon  the  repayments  from  power  from  that  dam  exclusively? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  then  below  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam,  all  additional  or  secondary 
projects,  like  the  Indian  Reservation  spoken  of  and  the  all-American  canal  and  any 
others,  would  pay  individually  for  that  expense  by  those  who  used  the  water? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir.  It  is  a  fact.  Mr.  Chairman,  that  in  the  decades  of  develop- 
ment we  have  had  in  irrigation,  all  of  the  easy  projects  have  been  built,  apd  the  only 
way  of  increasing  the  resources  of  irrigated  land  in  any  part  of  the  West,  with  a  few 
trivial  exceptions,  is  by  expensive  work,  that  requires  a  long  time  for  construction 
and  a  great  deal  of  money,  and  if  the  cost  of  those  works  is  increased,  some  of  them 
are  made  not  feasible  and  others  are  made  not  feasible  for  a  period  of  time;  and  in 
this  case,  where  the  full  conservation  of  the  water  is  in  excess  of  the  land — that  is 
not  true  everywhere  but  it  is  on  the  lower  Colorado — it  would  he  a  destruction  of  re- 
sources to  put  any  unnecessary  charge  upon  the  lands  to  be  irrigated. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Mr.  Davis,  would  the  primary  benefit  of  this  dam  be  the  protection 
of  the  Imperial  Valley? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  That  is  the  most  urgent  thing.  Mr.  Sinnott;  yes.  sir. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Then  in  the  next  place,  power? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  In  money  value  the  power  comes  first.  In  operation.  I  think  irrigation 
should  have  the  preference,  because  it  would  disturb  power  very  little  to  accommo- 
date itself  to  irrigation,  whereas  if  you  reveised  it,  you  might  make  prohibitive  some 
of  the  irrigation. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Can  you  take  care  of  all  the  hazards  of  the  river  at  the  Boulder  Dam? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  You  mean  during  construction? 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Xo;  I  mean  after  it  is  constructed,  can  you  care  for  all  the  flood  waters 
of  the  river  at  the  Boulder  Dam? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  sir;  if  built  as  proposed,  it  will  hold  more  than  an  entire  year's 
flow.  It  will  hold  nearly  all  of  a  maximum  year's  flow  if  it  were  empty.  It  will  not 
be  necessary,  however,  to  hold  it  empty,  because  at  that  point  the  floods  all  come  in 
about  three  months;  in  fact,  nearly  always  in  June. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF  LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX.  33 

Mr.  SiN'NOTT.  What  is  the  minimum  flow  in  second  feet? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  At  that  point  s  '.miething  like  4,000  cubic  feet  per  second  in  very  low 
years.  It  seldom  goes  down  to  that  amount. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  What  is  the  mean  flow?  . 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  mean  flow  is  about  22,000  second-feet. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  And  the  mixirnum? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Something;  like  200.000.  as  nearly  as  our  records  show  it. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  About  four  times  the  low  water  flow  of  the  Columbia,  which  is  about 
50.000  second  feet  at  The  Dalles? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  I  did  not  .suppose  that  the  Columbia  down  at  The  Dalles  ever 
got  that  low. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  Yes:  the  minimum  is  about  50.000  second  feet. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  Mr.  Davis.  I  would  like  to  ask  you  a,  question  because  this  is  a  matter 
that  will  come  up  and  by  getting  a  little  information  on  it  now  we  will  have  some- 
thing upon  which  to  act.  Suppose  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  is  put  in  as  designated, 
fully  equipped  with  electric  distributing  lines  and  all  that  sort  of  thing,  you  can 
control  all  the  flood  waters? 

Mr.  I  >.\vis.   Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Would  that  relieve  the  condition  down  at  the  diverting  dam  of  the 
present  Imperial  Valley  Canal? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  No.  Relief  at  that  point  requires  a  connection  of  the  Imperial  Canal 
with  the  Laguna  Dam,  which  means  the  building  of  about  15  or  16  miles  of  canal. 

Mr.  RAKER.  The  floods  being  controlled,  could  those  people  use  their  present 
works  with  considerable  safety? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  With  greater  safety,  yes.  sir:  but  the  floods  of  the  Gila  River,  of  course, 
would  still  be  there  and  until  that  is  taken  care  of  I  do  not  think  the  conditions  would 
be  entirely  safe. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Then  with  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  completed  and  with  the  present 
condition  of  the  works  there,  the  Imperial  Valley  people  are  still  in  the  same  condition 
they  are  now,  by  virtue  of  the  flood  waters  from  the  Gila  River? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  No;  not  the  same  condition  they  are  in  now,  because  the  major  menace 
will  be  removed.  The  greatest  menace  to  the  Imperial  Valley  is  not  merely  the 
breaking  of  the  levees,  but  a  break  at  the  beginning  of  the  high  water  period  of  the 
Colorado  River,  when  it  will  be  in  too  large  volume  to  be  controlled,  and  will  continue 
to  run  into  the  valley  for  a  period  of  months,  cutting  a  great  deep  gash  in  there  that 
it  will  afterwards  be  practically  impossible  or  at  least  very  difficult  and  very  expensive 
to  close,  and  which  would  submerge  a  lot  of  land  before  you  could  get  it  closed. 

Mr.  RAKER.  If  we  are  now  going  to  relieve  them  from  the  flood  waters  of  the  Colorado 
River,  they  will  still  have  difficulty  on  their  hands  by  virtue  of  the  flood  waters  from 
the  Gila  River,  even  though  the  Colorado  River  floods  are  controlled? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Xo,  sir;  for  this  reason:  The  floods  of  the  Gila  River  are  so  short  that  while 
they  will  still  have  to  levee  against  them,  they  are  not  very  likely  to  destroy  the  levee 
because  they  do  not  last  long  enough  to  cut  the  banks  and"  undermine  the  levee;  and 
in  the  second  place,  if  they  should  destroy  the  levee  and  go  through,  they  are  over  so 
quickly  that  repairs  can  be  made  in  the  dry. 

Mr.  SWING.  The  Imperial  Valley  would  still  have  the  problem  of  getting  the  water 
out  of  the  river  and  getting  it  to  the  Imperial  Valley  without  going  to  Mexico,  unless 
the  all- American  canal  were  built? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  was  leaving  Mexico  out  of  it  and  was  just  referring  to  the  physical 
conditions  already  existing. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  The  Gila  River  should  ultimately  be  controlled,  but  the  floods 
from  that  river  are  not  as  dangerous  by  any  means  as  tne  floods  of  the  Colorado. 

Mr.  HAVDEX.  In  your  report  you  state  that  there  are  520,000  acres  of  land  now  irri- 
gated below  Boulder  Canyon  and  about  700,000  additional  acres  could  be  irrigated 
as  far  as  you  have  investigated  the  matter.  The  table  which  you  have  in  your  report 
shows  that  there  is  now  irrigated  in  Arizona  by  gravity  54,000  acres;  that  there  can  be 
irrigated  by  gravity  155.000  acres  additional. 

Mr.  DAVIS.   What  page  is  that  on? 

Mr.  HAVDEX.  The  table  is  printed  on  the  colored  map  inserted  before  page  21. 
That  makes  a  total  of  209,000  acres  that  could  be  irrigated  by  gravity.  The  table 
shows  70.000  acres  to  be  irrigated  by  pumping  or  a  total  of  279,000  acres  that  you 
estimate  can  be  irrigated  in  Arizona.  Many  people  in  Arizona,  of  which  I  am  one, 
have  been  hopeful  that  a  much  larger  area  might  be  irrigated  from  the  Colorado  River 
in  our  State.  I  want  to  ask  you  what  detailed  study  you  have  made  of  the  irrigation 
possibilities  in  Arizona.  If  cheap  power  were  available  have  you  made  investigations 
as  to  the  possibility  of  lifting  water  upon  the  higher  mesas  and  thus  reclaiming  addi- 
tional tracts  of  land? 


34  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  There  are  undoubtedly  small  tracts  here  and  there — the  aggregate 
being  considerable — that  could  be  added  by  increasing  the  pumping  lift,  of  couife. 
It  is  admitted  there  is  considerable  margin  of  expansion  possible. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  It  would  depend,  to  a  large  extent,  on  how  cheap  the  power  was  as 
to  how  high  the  water  could  be  lifted. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  The  cheaper  the  power  the  more  extensive  the  area  which  can  be 
irrigated? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  There  has  been  some  discussion  of  a  high-line  canal  following  about 
the  1,200  or  1,300  foot  contour  below  Boulder  Canyon,  which  would  cover  an  immense 
area  of  land  in  Arizona.  I  have  made  a  study  of  the  map  of  Arizona  and  find  that  a 
very  large  proportion  of  the  area  proposed  to  be  irrigated  by  this  high-line  canal 
has  never  been  topographically  mapped.  I  have  inquired  of  the  United  States 
Geological  Survey  as  to  whether  funds  were  available  for  a  topographic  survey  of 
northern  Yuma  County  and  the  western  part  of  Maricopa  County.  The  director  has 
not  given  me  a  very  definite  answer  except  to  say  that  he  thought  that  it  might  be 
highly  desirable  to  have  such  a  survey  made  in  cooperation  with  the  State  of  Arizona. 
Have  you  ever  made  a  study  to  determine  what  areas  in  southwestern  Arizona  should 
be  accurately  mapped,  to  ascertain  the  additional  lands  that  might  he  irrigated  fiom 
the  Colorado  River? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir.  There  is  an  investigation  about  starting  now  in  the  State  of 
Arizona,  where,  on  their  request  we  are  to  detail  one  engineer  and  the  Geological 
Survey  one  engineer,  and  the  State  one,  and  that  board  will  have  charge  of  a  fund 
the  State  has  for  making  investigations  of  contour  in  the  Colorado  Valley  and  any  part 
of  southwestern  Arizona  and  will  undoubtedly  throw  light  on  what  could  be  topo- 
graphically mapped.  I  could  lay  out  by  guess  what  could  be,  but  I  do  not  think  that 
should  be  taken  as  a  guide,  because  the  information  is  too  meager  in  the  unmapped 
regions.  Some  such  preliminary  investigation  as  this  would  be  a  good  undertaking 
to  find  out  how  much  money  would  be  necessary  for  it  all. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  About  how  much  money  would  be  necessary  for  such  an  investiga- 
tion? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  have  not  been  informed,  but  they  have  asked  us  if  we  would  under- 
take that  kind  of  cooperation  and  we  have  answered  in  the  affirmative. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  After  these  three  engineers  have  made  a  reconnaissance  examination 
of  the  country,  will  it  then  be  possible  to  intelligently  direct  the  Geological  Survey 
as  to  what  areas  should  be  topographically  surveyed  with  a  view  to  determining 
whether  irrigation  from  the  Colorado  River  is  practicable? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  I  understand  the  Boulder  Dam  will  cost  about  $48,000,000? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  And  the  construction  of  power  lines  and  other  construction  neces- 
sary to  utilize  the  power  would  probably  cost  about  an  equal  amount? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  It  would  run  about  $100,000,000.  It  would  depend  upon  where  the 
power  was  taken. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  But  figuring  on  general  averages  down  through  that  country  of 
mileages. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  As  near  as  I  care  to  state  it  would  take  a  little  more  than  the  cost  of  the 
dam. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  So  practically  $100,000,000  to  utilize  the  power  that  would  create 
the  revenue  which  is  to  repay  the  cost  of  construction? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  The  whole  thing. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  Is  the  Government  to  advance  that  $100,000,000? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  According  to  the  bill,  no.  The  bill  as  introduced  and  referred  to  this 
committee  provided  only  for  the  construction  of  the  dam  and  the  high-line  canal,  and 
the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  in  his  report  on  it  suggests  a  method  of  financing  and  a 
program  of  building  also  the  generating  machinery,  that  would  be  built  at  the  site  of  the 
dam,  leaving  the  customers,  the  power  companies,  and  others  to  build  their  own 
transmission  lines. 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  As  I  understand,  there  would  be  about  400,000  additional  acres  that 
could  be  irrigated  from  that?  What  charge  have  you  estimated  will  probably  be  put 
on  that  land  for  water? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  What  I  had  in  mind  was  to  charge  them  the  cost  of  the  works,  but  the 
details  of  the  distribution  system  have  not  been  gone  into.  The  main  canal  would  cost 
about  $30,000,000,  and  that  divided  by  the  acreage  it  would  serve,  would — 

Mr.  SUMMERS.  That  would  all  be  charged  to  this  400,000  acres  irrigated? 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWEK   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX.  35 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Xo,  not  at  all.  The  present  irrigated  lands  would  be  charged  with 
some  of  it,  I  think.  That  is  a  matter  to  be  left  to  some  kind  of  equitable  adjudication 
by  the  Secretary  of  Inferior  later. 

The  CHAIRMAN-.  Under  the  Secretary's  plan  how  much  will  the  Government  be 
supposed  to  advance — S48,000,000  for  the  dam  and  how  much? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  In  the  neighborhood  of  $100,000,000. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  As  I  read  Secretary  Fall's  report  on  this  bill  he  suggests  a  bonding 
plan  somewhat  similar  to  that  upon  which  funds  were  raised  to  constiuct  the  Panama 
Canal? 

Mr.  DAVIS,  lie  suggested  the  bonding  plan.  I  do  not  remember  how  closely  it 
was  followed  in  the  Panama  Canal,  but  it  has  this  difference:  that  the  same  authority 
requires  him  to  sell  this  power  at  a  rate  to  provide  interests  and  sinking  funds  to 
retire  those  bonds.  In  other  words,  the  requirement  is  put  on  this  that  will  stand  the 
cost  of  those  bonds— the  amortization.  That  is  not  connected  with  the  Panama  Canal. 

Mr.  HAYDKX.  The  Panama  Canal  was  built  by  direct  appropriations,  but  wherever 
there  was  a  lack  of  funds  in  the  Treasury  authority  was  granted  to  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  to  sell  bonds,  and  some  Panama  Canal  bonds  were  sold. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  That  is  true. 

Mr.  HAYDKX.  If  there  is  to  be  a  bond  issue  should  it  not  be  large  enough  to  include 
both  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  and  the  power  plants  and  then  to 
provide  for  the  various  irrigation  projects  down  the  stream  that  may  be  demonstrated 
to  be  feasible?  In  other  words,  should  not  the  same  bond  issue  also  take  care  of  the 
Parker  irrigation  project  and  all-American  canal  for  Imperial  Valley  as  well  as  for  the 
Boulder  Canyon  dam  itself? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Xo.  It  would  have  to  be  treated  separately,  because  it  would  have 
to  be  refunded  in  a  different  manner,  and  in  my  opinion  the  irrigation  projects — some 
of  them  certainly  and  perhaps  most  of  them — could  not  stand  an  interest  charge. 
At  least,  they  could  not  with  the  certainty  that  the  power  can,  and  the  market  for 
bonds  with  irrigation  basis  would  not  be  near  so  good  as  with  the  power  basis,  because 
the  power  basis  is  sure  shot — it  will  pay — we  know  that. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  What  proportion  of  thifl  entire  amount  would  be  reimbursable — is  to 
be  repaid  from  the  us"  of  the  plant  and  all  its  accessories? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  All  of  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  The  entire  amount? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  si?-. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  So.  there  is  no  direct  appropriation  for  even  the  development  or  the 
prevention  of  floods  that  is  not  to  be  repaid  from  the  entire  plant? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  By  some  one  who  eventually  uses  it? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  That  is  the  idea. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  your  view  is.  from  your  examination  of  all  the  reports,  that  within 
a  reasonable  length  of  time  the  money  can  be  repaid  and  will  be  repaid  with  a  rea- 
sonable rate  of  interest? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  sir:  so  far  as  the  bill  and  the  Secretary's  amendments  to  the  bill 
are  concerned  that  is  true.  So  far  as  irrigation  is  concerned,  I  have  my  doubt  about 
some  of  them  being  able  to  pay  interest :  but  those  covered  by  the  bill  certainly  could. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  In  this  bill  then  we  do  not  even  go  as  far  as  we  do  in  the  Sacramento 
River  flood  control  or  in  the  Mississippi  River  flood  control,  that  is.  to  provihe  funds 
to  develop  and  prevent  the  Hood  caused  by  those  rivers  overflowing  adjoining  lands, 
and  we  get  no  record  return  from  the  latter  two  as  in<li\  iduals? 

Mr.  DAVIS.   In  that  respect  it  is  distinctly  different;  yes.  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Is  not  the  distinction  due  to  the  fact  that  the  Sacramento  and  Mis- 
sissippi Rivers  are  navigable  streams,  and  under  the  flood  control  act  there  was  a  find- 
ing by  a  board  of  Army  engineers  as  to  what  Federal  interest  was  involved?  Part  of 
the  on.-t  \\;>-  cl,  to  the  United  States  by  reason  of  navigation  and  the  remainder 

is  a  charge  against  lands  benefited  by  the  levees. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  the  engineers'  report,  but  I  do  know  that 
the  Colorado  River  is  navigable  in  the  same  sense  that  the  Sacramento  River  is. 
They  are  both  technically  and  actually  navigable,  but  practically  little  used. 

Mr.  RAKER.  The  main  point  that  I  was  trying  to  find  our  i>  that  there  \vill  he  IM 
question  hereafter  about  what  relief  will  be  given  the  Imperial  Valley  by  virtue  of  con- 
trolling the  floods.  We  are  doing  now  for  the  Sa'-ramentu  River  and  the  great  Mis- 
sissippi River  the  same  thing,  and  it  is  not  reimbursable. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  But  with  this  entire  dam,  commencing  with  the  Boulder  Creek  dam 
and  all  its  accessories  and  uses,  you  are  to  charge  enough  money  for  its  use  to,  within 
a  reasonable  time,  repay  the  principal  with  interest? 


36  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    BASIX. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  Your  statement  would  be  absolutely  accurate.  Judge  Raker,  if  you 
would  say  that  a  part  of  the  Mississippi  flood  control  work  and  a  part  of  Sacramento 
flood  control  work  is  done  as  a  gratuity  on  the  part  of  the  Government.  The  whole 
amount  is  not.  I  am  quite  sure,  appropriated  and  paid  for  out  of  the  Federal  Treasury. 
There  is  a  substantial  charge  against  the  levee  districts. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  did  not  go  into  that.     So  far  as  the  Government  appropriation  is  con- 
cerned, we  spent  this  money.     It  is  not  a  criticism,  but  we  spent  the  money  for  flood 
control  and  I  am  just  wondering  whether  or  not  in  this  instance  they  could  make  any 
objection  that  we  prevent  floods  from  the  Imperial  Valley,  where,  as  a  matter  of  fact. 
all  the  money  expended  in  this  enterprise  is  to  be  reimbursed. 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  On  the  Mississippi  River  the  levee  districts  are  supposed  to  con- 
tribute one  third  and  the  Government  two  thirds,  two-thirds  being  contributed  by  the 
Federal  Government  on  the  theory  the  river  is  navigable.  The  Mississippi  River 
people  at  this  time  are  contemplating  a  scheme  somewhat  like  this:  In  order  to  complete 
the  construction  of  the  levees  on  the  Mississippi  River  and  do  it  by  the  issuing  of  bonds 
of  the  levee  districts  and  turning  those  funds  in  by  paying  all  the  expense  of  the  projects. 

Mr.  RAKER.  But  there  is  this  distinction,  bearing  in  mind  that  this  territory  now 
could  be  destroyed — might  be  destroyed  any  day  by  virtue  of  floods — and  by  building 
the  Boulder  Canvon  Dam  it  will  prevent  the  floods  and  the  Government  will  be  reim- 
bursed for  all  this  money  expended.  Down  below,  as  to  the  question  of  irrigation,  on 
the  question  of  a  canal  or  any  system  they  put  in  there,  these  people  for  the  use  of  that 
canal  will  pay  all  the  expense.  That  is  right,  is  it  not,  Mr.  Davis? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  They  will  return  all  that  is  put  into  it. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  You  are  simply  pointing  out  the  expenditures  contemplated  on  the 
Mississippi  River  and  the  expenditures  here.  In  one  case  on  the  Mississippi  River 
it  will  never  be  returned  to  the  Government,  and  here  it  will  all  be  returned? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  I  want  to  get  your  statement  clear  on  that  money  question.  He 
asked  you  how  much  money  the  Government  would  have  to  put  up  on  this  whole 
proposition.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  the  Secretary,  under  his  bill,  can  enter  into  a  contract 
after  he  starts  that  work  and  receive  money  to  finish  this  dam,  so  that  the  Government 
would  not  have  to  put  up  this  entire  amount? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  If  the  Secretary's  recommendations  are  passed  the  Government  will  not 
have  to  appropriate  anything.  It  provides  for  the  issuing  of  bonds  by  the  Government 
and  the  Government  credit  being  behind  them,  and  the  bonds  to  be  paid  off  from  the 
power  receipts,  interest  and  principal. 

The  CHAIRMAN.  The  Government  backs  the  bonds? 

Mr.  DAVIS.  Yes,  sir;  the  Government  backs  the  bonds. 

(Thereupon,  at  12.10,  the  committee  adjourned.) 

Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States— Xo.  3  Original. — October  term,  1921. — The 
State  of  Wyoming,  complainant,  v.  The  State  of  Colorado,  the  Greeley-Poudre 
Irrigation  District,  and  the  Laramie-Poudre  Reservoirs  and  Irrigation  Company. 

[June  5,  1922.] 

Mr.  Justice  VAN  DEVAXTER  delivered  the  opinion  of  the  court. 

This  is  an  original  suit  in  this  court  by  the  State  of  Wyoming  against  the  State  of 
Colorado  and  two  Colorado  corporations  to  prevent  a  proposed  diversion  in  Colorado 
of  part  of  the  waters  of  the  Laramie  River,  an  interstate  stream.  The  bill  was  brought 
in  1911,  the  evidence  was  taken  in  1913  and  1914,  and  the  parties  put  it  in  condensed 
and  narrative  form  in  1916  preparatory  to  the  usual  printing.  The  case  has  been 
argued  at  the  bar  three  times.  The  court  directed  one  reargument  because  of  the 
novelty  and  importance  of  some  of  the  questions  involved,  and  the  other  because  of 
an  intervening  succession  in  the  office  of  Chief  Justice.  As  the  United  States  appeared 
to  have  a  possible  interest  in  some  of  the  questions,  the  court  also  directed  that  the 
suit  be  called  to  the  attention  of  the  Attorney  General:  and.  by  the  court's  leave,  a 
representative  of  the  United  States  participated  in  the  subsequent  hearings. 

The  Laramie  is  an  unnavigable  river  which  has  its  source  in  the  mountains  of  north- 
ern Colorado,  flows  northerly  27  miles  in  that  State,  crosses  into  Wyoming,  and  there 
flows  northerly  and  northeasterly  150  miles  to  the  North  Platte  River,  of  which  it  is  a 
tributary.  Both  Colorado  and  Wyoming  are  in  the  arid  region  where  flowing  waters 
are,  and  long  have  been,  commonly  diverted  from  their  natural  channels  and  used  in 
irrigating  the  soil  and  making  it  productive.  For  many  years  some  of  the  waters  .of 
the  Laramie  River  have  been  subjected  to  such  diversion  and  use,  part  in  Colorado 
and  part  in  Wyoming. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX.  37 

When  this  suit  was  brought  the  two  corporate  defendants,  acting  under  the  authority 
and  permission  of  Colorado,  were  proceeding  to  divert  in  that  State  a  considerable 
portion  of  the  waters  of  the  river  and  to  conduct  the  same  into  another  watershed, 
lying  wholly  in  Colorado,  for  use  in  irrigating  lands  more  than  fifty  miles  distant  from 
the  point  of  diversion.  The  topography  and  natural  drainage  are  such  that  none  of  the 
water  can  return  to  the  stream  or  ever  reach  Wyoming. 

By  the  bill  Wyoming  seeks  to  prevent  this  diversion  on  two  grounds:  One  that, 
without  her  sanction,  the  waters  of  this  interstate  stream  can  not  riditi'ully  be  taken 
from  its  watershed  and  carried  into  another  where  she  never  can  receive  any  benefit 
from  them;  and  the  other  that  through  many  appropriations  made  at  great  cost,  which 
are  prior  in  time  and  superior  in  right  to  the  proposed  Colorado  diversion,  Wyoming 
and  her  citizens  have  become  and  are  entitled  to  use  a  large  portion  of  the  waters  of 
the  river  in  the  irrigation  of  lands  in  that  State  and  that  the  proposed  Colorado  diver- 
sion will  not  leave  in  the  stream  sufficient  water  to  satisfy  these  prior  and  superior 
appropriations,  and  so  will  work  irreparable  prejudice  to  Wyoming  and  her  citizens. 

By  the  answers  Colorado  and  her  codefendants  seek  to  justify  and  sustain  the  pro- 
posed diversion  on  three  distinct  grounds:  First,  that  it  is  the  right  of  Colorado  as  a 
State  to  dispose,  as  she  may  choose,  of  any  part  or  all  of  the  waters  flowing  in  the  por- 
tion of  the  river  within  her  borders,  "regardless  of  the  prejudice  that  it  may  work'' 
to  Wyoming  and  her  citizens;  secondly,  that  Colorado  is  entitled  to  an  equitable 
division  of  the  waters  of  the  river  and  that  the  proposed  diversion,  together  with  all 
subsisting  appropriations  in  Colorado,  does  not  exceed  her  share:  and.  thirdly,  that 
after  the  proposed  diversion  there  will  be  left  in  the  river  and  its  tributaries  inWyoming 
sufficient  water  to  satisfy  all  appropriations  in  that  State  whose  origin  was  prior  in 
time  to  the  effective  inception  of  the  right  under  which  the  proposed  Colorado  diversion 
is  about  to  be  made. 

Before  taking  up  the  opposing  contentions  a  survey  of  several  matters  in  the  light 
of  which  they  should  be  approached  and  considered  is  in  order. 

Both  Colorado  and  Wyoming  are  along  the  apex  of  the  Continental  Divide,  and 
include  high  mountain  ranges  where  heavy  snows  fall  in  winter  and  melt  in  late  spring 
and  early  summer,  this  being  the  chief  source  of  water  supply.  Small  streams  in 
the  mountains  gather  the  water  from  the  malting  snow  and  conduct  it  to  larger  streams 
bi'bw  which  ultimately  pass  into  surrounding  States.  The  flow  in  all  streams  varies 
greatly  in  the  cours3  of  the  year,  being  highest  in  May,  Tune,  and  July,  and  relatively 
verv  low  in  other  months.  There  is  also  a  pronounced  variation  from  year  to  year. 
To  illustrate,  the  gauging  of  the  Cache  la  Poudre,  a  typical  stream,  for  191^  shows  that 
the  total  flo\v  for  May,  JunQ,  and  July  was  more  than  three  times  that  for  the  nine 
other  momh<,  and  the  gauging  for  a  pariod  of  30  years  shows  that  the  yearly  flow  varied 
from  151,636  to  666,466  acre-feet1  and  was  in  excess  of  400,000  acre-feet  in  each  of  four 
years  uu-I  !<•<-•  than  175.000  acre-feat  in  each  of  five  years.  Both  Stat"s  have  vast 
plains  and  many  valleys  of  varying  elevation  where  there  is  not  sufficient  natural 
precipitation  to  moi-T"ii  rh  •  soil  and  make  it  productive,  but  where,  when  additional 
water  is  applied  artificially,  the  soil  becomes  fruitful — the  reward  being  generous  in 
some  areas  and  moderate  in  others,  just  as  husbandry  is  variously  rewarded  in  States 
where  there  is  greater  humidity,  such  as  Massachusetts,  Virginia.  Ohio,  and  Tennessee. 
Both  States  were  Territories  long  before  they  were  admitted  into  the  Union  as  States 
and  while  the  Territorial  condition  continued  were  under  the  full  dominion  of  the 
United  States.  At  first  the  United  States  owned  all  the  lands  in  both  and  it  still  owns 
and  is  offering  for  disposal  millions  of  acres  in  ouch. 

Turning  to  the  decisions  of  the  courts  of  last  tvsurt  in  the  two  States,  we  learn  that 
the  same  doctrine  respecting  the  diversion  and  use  of  the  waters  of  natural  streams 
has  prevailed  in  both  from  the  beginning  and  that  <'.irh  St-ite  ai tributes  much  of  her 
development  and  prosperity  to  the  practical  operation  of  this  doctrine.  The  relevant 
views  of  the  origin  and  nature  of  the  doctrine  as  shown  in  these  decisions  may  be 
summarized  as  follows:  The  common  law  rule  respecting  riparian  rights  in  flowing 
water  never  obtained  in  either  State.  It  always  was  deemed  inapplicable  to  their 
situation  and  climatic  conditions.  The  earliest  settlers  gave  effect  to  a  different  rule 
whereby  the  waters  of  the  streams  were  regarded  as  open  to  appropriation  for  irrigation, 
mining;  and  other  beneficial  purposes.  The  diversion  from  the  stream  and  the  applica- 
tion of  the  water  to  a  beneficial  purpose  constituted  an  appropriation,  and  the  ap- 
propriator  was  treated  as  acquiring  a  continuing  right  to  divert  and  use  the  water  to 
the  extent  of  his  appropriation,  but  not  beyond  what  was  reasonably  required  and 
actually  used.  This  was  deemed  a  property  right  and  dealt  with  and  respected  ac- 
cordingly. As  between  different  appropriations  from  the  same  stream,  the  one  iir.-t 
in  time  was  deemed  superior  in  right,  and  a  completed  appropriation  was  regarded  as 
effective  from  the  time  the  purpose  to  make  it  was  definitely  formed  and  actual  work 

1  An  acre-foot  is  the  quantity  of  water  required  to  cover  an  acre  to  a  depth  of  one  foot — 13,560  cubic  feet. 


38  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER.  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX. 

thereon  was  begun,  provided  the  work  was  carried  to  completion  with  reasonable 
diligence.  This  doctrine  of  appropriation,  prompted  by  necessity  and  formulated 
by  custom,  received  early  legislative  recognition  in  both  Territories  and  -vas  enforced 
in  their  couit-.  When  the  state?  were  admitted  into  the  Union  it  received  further 
sanction  in  their  constitutions  and  statutes  and  their  courts  have  been  uniformly 
enforcing  it.  Yunker  r.  Nichols  (1  Colo.  551):  Schilling  r.  Romincrer  (4  Colo.  100); 
Coffin  r.  Left  Hand  Ditch  Co.  (6  Colo.  443);  Thomas  v.  Guiraud  i  U  Colo.  530  :  Strickler  ( 
r.  Colorado  Springs  (16  Colo.  61);  Oppenlander  r.  Left  Hand  Ditch  Co.  (1$  Colo.  142); 
Wyatt  r.  Larimer" and  Weld  Irrigation  Co.  (18  Colo.  298);  Crippen  v.  White  (28  Colo. 
298);  Moyer  r.  Preston  (6  Wyo.  308);  Farm  Investment  Co.  r.  Carpenter  (!i  Wyo.  L10); 
Willev  c".  Decker  (11  Wyo."  496);  Johnston  7'.  Little  Horse  Creek  Irrieatimr  Co.  (13 
Wyo.  208). 

As  the  United  States  possessed  plenary  authority  over  Colorado  and  Wyoming 
while  they  were  Territories  and  has  at  all  times  owned  the  public  lands  therein,  we 
turn  next  to  its  action. 

The  act  of  July  26.  1866  (ch.  262.  sec.  9.  14  Stat.  251 '«.  contained  a  section  providing: 
' '  Whenever,  by  priori  ty  of  "possession,  rights  to  the  use  of  water  for  mining,  agricultural , 
manufacturing,  or  other  purposes  have  vested  and  accrued,  and  the  same  are  recog- 
nized and  acknowledged  by  the  local  customs,  laws,  and  the  decisions  of  courts,  the 
pos?essors  and  owners  of  such  vested  rights  shall  be  maintained  and  protected  in  the 
same."  The  occasion  for  this  provision  and  its  purpose  and  effect  were  extensively 
considered  by  this  court  in  the  cases  of  Atchison  r.  Peterson  (20  Wall.  507)  and  Bascy 
r.  Gallagher  (20  Wall.  670).  the  conclusions  in  both  being  shown  in  the  following 
excerpt  from  the  latter,  pp.  681-682: 

"In  the  late  case  of  Atchison  r.  Peterson,  we  had  occasion  to  consider  the  respective 
rights  of  miners  to  running  waters  on  the  mineral  lands  of  the  public  domain:  and 
we  there  held  that  by  the  custom  which  had  obtained  among  miners  in  the  Pacific 
States  and  Territories,  the  party  who  first  subjected  the  water  to  use  or  took  the  n< 
s.uy  steps  for  that  purpose,  was  regarded,  except  as  against  the  Government,  as  the 
source  of  title  in  all  controversies  respecting  it:  that  the  doctrines  of  the  common 
law  declaratory  of  the  rights  of  riparian  proprietors  were  inapplicable,  or  applicable 
only  to  a  limited  extent,  to  the  necessities  of  miners,  and  were  inadequate  to  their 
protection:  that  the  equality  of  right  recognized  by  that  law  among  all  the  proprietors 
upon  the  same  stream,  would  have  been  incompatible  with  any  extended  diversion 
of  the  water  by  one  proprietor,  and  its  conveyance  for  mining  purposes  to  points 
from  which  it  could  not  be  restored  to  the  stream:  that  the  Government  l>y  its  silent 
acquiescence  had  assented  to  and  encouraged  the  occupation  of  the  public  lands  for 
mining:  and  that  he  who  first  connected  his  la)  or  with  property  thus  situated  and 
open  to  general  exploration,  did  in  natural  justice  acquire  a  better  right  to  its  use  and 
enjoyment  than  others  who  had  not  given  such  labor:  that  the  miners  on  the  public 
lands  throughout  the  Pacific  States  and  Territories,  by  their  customs,  usages,  and 
regulations,  had  recognized  the  inherent  justice  of  this  principle,  and  the  principle 
itself  was  at  an  early  period  recognized  by  legislation  and  enforced  by  the  courts  in 
those  States  and  Territories,  and  was  finally  approved  by  the  legislation  of  Congress 
in  1866.  The  views  there  expressed  and  the  rulings  made  are  equally  applicable  to 
the  use  of  water  on  the  public  lands  for  purposes  of  irrigation.  Xo  distinction  is  made 
in  those  States  and  Territories  by  the  custom  of  miners  or  settlers,  or  by  the  courts, 
in  the  rights  of  th,e  first  appropriator  from  the  use  made  of  the  water,  if  the  use  be  a 
beneficial  one." 

And  on  the  same  subject  it  was  further  said,  in  Broder  r.  Water  ('<>.     101  U.  S.  274, 

"It  is  the  established  doctrine  of  this  court  that  rights  of  miners,  who  had  taken 
possession  of  mines  and  worked  and  developed  them,  and  the  ri-rhts  of  persons  who 
had  constructed  canals  and  ditches  to  be  used  in  mining  operations  and  for  purp< 
of  agricultural  irrigation,  in  the  region  where  such  artificial  use  of  the  water  was  an 
absolute  necessity,  are  rights  which  the  Government  had.  by  its  conduct,  recognixed 
and  encouraged  and  was  bound  to  protect,  before  the  passage  of  the  act  of  I860'.  We 
are  of  opinion  that  the  section  of  the  act  which  we  have  quoted  was  rather  a  voluntary 
recognition  of  a  preexisting  right  of  possession,  constituting  a  valid  claim  of  its  con- 
tinued use,  than  the  establishment  of  a  new  01 

The  act  of  July  9,  1870  (ch.  235.  sec.  17.  Hi  Stat.  217 ),  provided  that ''all  patents 
granted,  or  preemption  or  homesteads  allowed,  shall  be  subject  to  any  vested  and 
accrued  water  rights"  acquired  under  or  recognized  by  the  provision  of  186G.  These 
provisions  are  now  sections  2339  and  2340  of  the  Revised  Statutes.  < 

The  act  of  March  3.   L877  (ch.   IT.  8ec.   I,  lit  Star.  377  .  providing  for  the  sale  of      (.-' 
desert  lands  in  tracts  of  one  section  each  to  persons  undertaking  and  effecting  their 
reclamation,  contained  a  proviso  declaring  that  "the  right  to  the  use  of  water  by  the 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX.  39 

person  so  conducting  the  same,  on  or  to  any  tract  of  desert  land  of  six  hundred  and 
forty  acres  shall  depend  upon  bona  fide  prior  appropriation;  and  such  right  shall 
not  exceed  the  amount  of  water  actually  appropriated,  and  necessarily  used  for  the 
purpose  of  irrigation  and  reclamation:  and  all  surplus  water  over  and  above  such 
actual  appropriation  and  use,  together  with  the  water  of  all  lakes,  rivers,  and  other 
sources  of  water  supply  upon  the  public  lands,  and  not  navigable,  shall  remain  and 
be  held  free  for  the  appropriation  and  use  of  the  public  for  irrigation,  mining,  and 
manufacturing  purposes  subject  to  exist  ing  rights."  Colorado  was  not  at  first  included 
in  this  act,  but  was  brought  in  by  an  amendatory  act.  Next  came  the  act  of  March  3, 
1891  (ch.  561,  sec.  18,  26  Stat.  1095),  granting  right  of  way  through  the  public  lands 
and  resarvations  for  canals  and  ditches  to  be  used  for  irrigation  purposes,  and  con- 
taining a  proviso  saying,  "the  privilege  herein  granted . shall  not  be  construed  to 
interfere  with  the  control  of  water  for  irrigation  and  other  purposes  under  authority 
of  the  respective  States  or  Territories." 

Of  the  legislation  thus  far  recited  it  was  said,  in  United  States  r.  Rio  Grande  Irriga- 
tion Co.  (174  U.  S.  690,  706):  "Obviously  by  these  acts,  so  far  as  they  extended,  Con- 
gress recognized  and  assented  to  the  appropriation  of  water  in  contravention  of  the 
common-law  rule  as  to  continuous  flow";  and  again,  "the  obvious  purpose  of  Congress 
waS  to  give  its  acs?nt,  so  far  ai  the  public  lands  were  concerned,  to  any  s>  stem,  although 
in  contravention  to  the  common-law  rule,  which  permitted  the  appropriation  of  those 
waters  far  legitimate  industries." 

June  17.  1902  i.ch.  1093,  32  Stat.  388),  the  national  reclamation  act  was  passed, 
under  which  the  United  States  entered  upon  the  construction  of  extensive  irrigation 
works  to  be  used  in  the  reclamation  of  large  bodies  of  arid  public  lands  in  the  Western 
States.  Its  eighth  section  declared:  "Nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  construed  as  af- 
fecting or  intended  to  affect  or  to  in  any  way  interfere  with  the  laws  of  any  State  or 
Territory  relating  to  the  control,  appropriation,  use,  or  distribution  of  water  used  in 
irrigation,  or  any  vested  right  acquired  thereunder,  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior, 
in  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this  act,  shall  proceed  in  conformity  with  such  laws, 
inul  itu!hiii<!  In riin  shall  in  umj  n'aij  affect  any  right  of  any  State  or  of  the  Federal 
.•it  or  of  any  lundotcner.  appropriator,  or  user  of  -water  in,  to,  or  from  any 
mterstati  stream  or  we  n-ti/crx  thereof:  rmridnl.  That  the  right  to  the  use  of  water 
acquired  under  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  appurtenant,  to  the  land  irrigated, 
and  beneficial  use  shall  be  the  basis,  the  measure,  and  the  limit  of  the  right."  The 
words  which  we  have  italicized  constitute  the  only  instance,  so  far  as  we  are  advised, 
in  which  the  legislation  of  Congress  relating  to  the  appropriation  of  water  in  the  arid 
land  region  has  contained  any  distinct  mention  of  interstate  streams.  The  explana- 
tion of  this  exceptional  mention  is  to  be  found  in  the  pendency  in  this  court  at  that 
time  of  the  case  of  Kansas  r.  Colorado,  wherein  the  relative  rights  of  the  two  States, 
the  United  States,  certain  Kansas  riparians  and  certain  Colorado  appropriators 
and  users  in  and  to  the  waters  of  the  Arkansas  River,  an  interstate  stream,  were  thought 
to  be  involved.  Congress  was  solicitous  that  all  quest  ions  respecting  interstate  streams 
thought,  to  be  involved  in  that  litigation  should  be  left  to  judicial  determination 
unaffected  by  the  act:  in  other  words,  that  the  matter  be  left  just  as  it  was  before. 
The  words  aptly  reflect  that  purpo 

The  decision  in  Kansas  r.  Colorado  (206  U.  S.  4(i)  was  a  pioneer  in  its  field.  On 
some  of  the  questions  presented  it  was  intended  to  be  and  is  comprehensive,  and  on 
others  it  was  intended  to  be  within  narrower  limits,  the  court  saying,  "The  views 
expressed  in  this  opinion  are  to  be  confined  to  a  case  in  which  the  facts  and  the  local 
law  of  the  two  States  are  as  here  disclosed."  On  full  consideration  it  was  broadly 
determined  that  a  controversy  I  KM  ween  two  States  over  the  diversion  and  use  of 
waters  of  a  stream  passing  from  one  to  the  other  "makes  a  matter  for  investigation  and 
determination  by  this  court"  in  the  exercise  of  its  original  jurisdiction,  and  also  that 
the  upper  State  on  such  a  stream  does  not  have  such  ownership  or  control  of  the  waters 
flowing  therein  as  entitles  her  to  divert  and  use  them  regardless  of  any  injury  or  preju- 
dice to  the  rights  of  the  lower  State  in  the  stream.  And,  on  consideration  of  the 
particular  facts  disclosed  and  the  local  law  of  the  two  Suites,  it  was  determined  that 
Colorado  was  not  taking  more  than  what  under  the  circumstances  would  lie  her  share 
under  an  equitable  apportionment. 

As  respects  the  scope 'and  interpretation  of  the  ultimate  conclusion  in  that  case, 
it  should  he  observed,  first,  that  the  court  was  there  concerned,  as  it  said,  with  a 
controversy  between  two  States,  "one  recognizing  generally  the  common-law  rule  of 
riparian  rights'"  and  the  other  the  doctrine  of  appropriation:  secondly,  that  the  diver- 
sion complained  of  was  not  1o  a  watershed  from  which  none  of  the  water  could  find  its 
way  into  the  complaining  State,  but  quite  to  the  contrary:  and,  thirdly,  that  what 
the  complaining  State  was  seeking  was  not  to  prevent  a  projmsed  diversion  for  the 
benefit  of  lands  as  yet  unreclaimed,  but  to  interfere  with  u  diversion  which  had  been 


40  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX. 

practiced  for  years  and  under  which  many  thousands  of  acres  of  unoccupied  and 
barren  lands  had  been  reclaimed  and  made  productive.  In  these  circumstances,  and 
after  observing  that  the  diminution  in  the  flow  of  the  river  had  resulted  in  "percepti- 
ble injurv"  TO  portions  of  the  valley  in  Kansas,  but  in  "little,  if  anv.  detriment"  to 
the  great  body  of  the  valley,  the  court  said,  "It  would  seem  equality  of  right  and  equity 
between  the  two  States  forbids  any  interference  with  the  present  withdrawal  of  water 
in  Colorado  for  purposes  of  irrigation."  and  that  if  the  depletion  of  the  waters  by  C 
Colorado  should  be  increased,  the  time  would  come  when  Kansas  mi'.-ht  "  rightfully  V 
call  for  relief  against  the  action  of  Colorado,  its  corporations,  and  citi/.ens  in  appropri- 
ating the  waters  of  the  Arkansas  for  irrigation  purposes."  What  was  there  said  about 
''eiualitv  of  rurht"  refers,  as  the  opinion  shows  ,-p.  !)7i,  not  to  an  e'jual  division  of 
the  water,  but  to  the  e  ]ual  level  or  plane  on  which  all  the  State-  stand,  in  point  of 
power  and  right,  under  our  constitutional  system. 

Like  that  case,  the  one  now  before  us  presents  a  controversy  over  the  waters  of  an 
interstate  stream.  But  here  the  controversy  is  between  States  in  both  of  which  the 
doctrine  of  appropriation  has  prevailed  from  the  time  of  the  lirst  settlements,  alwavs 
has  been  applied  in  the  same  way.  and  has  been  recognized  and  sanctioned  by  the 
United  States,  the  owner  of  the  public  lands.  Here  the  complaining  State  is  not 
seeking  to  impose  a  policy  of  her  choosing  on  the  other  State,  but  to  have  the  com- 
mon policy  which  each  enforces  within  her  limits  applied  in  determining  their  rela- 
tive rights  in  the  interstate  stream.  Nor  is  the  United  States  seeking  to  impose  a 
policy  of  its  choosing  on  either  State.  All  that  it  has  done  has  been  to  recognize 
and  give  its  sanction  to  the  policy  which  each  has  adopted.  Whether  its  public  land 
holdings  would  enable  it  to  go  further  we  need  not  consider.  And  here  the  complain- 
ing State  is  not  seeking  to  interfere  with  a  diversion  which  has  long  been  practiced, 
and  under  which  much  reclamation  has  been  effected,  but  to  prevent  a  proposed 
diversion  for  the  benefit  of  lands  as  yet  unreclaimed . 

With  this  understanding  of  the  case  in  hand  and  of  some  of  the  matters  in  the  light 
of  which  it  should  be  considered,  we  take  up  the  several  contentions,  before  noticed, 
which  are  pressed  on  our  attention. 

The  contention  of  Colorado  that  she  as  a  State  rightfully  may  divert  and  use,  as  she 
may  choose,  the  waters  flowing  within  her  boundaries  in  this  interstate  stream,  re- 
gardless of  any  prejudice,  that  this  may  work  to  others  having  rights  in  the  stream  be- 
low her  boundary,  can  not  be  maintained.  The  river  throughout  its  course  in  both 
States  is  but  a  single  stream  wherein  each  State  has  an  interest  which  should  be  re- 
spected by  the  other.  A  like  contention  was  set  up  by  Colorado  in  her  answer  in 
Kansas  r.  Colorado  and  was  adjudged  untenable.  Further  consideration  satisfies  us 
that  the  ruling  was  ri«;ht.  It  has  support  in  other  cases,  of  which  Rickey  Land  &  Cattle 
Co.  v.  Miller  and  Lux  (218  U.  S.  2158  :  I  Jean  v.  Morris  (221  U.  S.  485);  Missouri  s. 
Illinois  (180  U.  S.  208  and  200  U.  S.  496),  and  Georgia  r.  Tennessee  Copper  Co.  (206 
I".  S.  230  .  are  examples. 

The  objection  of  Wyoming  to  the  proposed  diversion  on  the  ground  that  it  is  to  an- 
other watershed,  from  which  she  can  receive  no  benefit,  is  also  untenable.  The  fact 
that  the  diversion  is  to  such  a  watershed  has  a  bearing  in  another  connection,  but  does 
not  in  itself  constitute  a  ground  for  condemning  it.  In  neither  State  does  the  right  of 
appropriation  depend  on  the  place  of  use  being  within  the  same  watershed.  Diver- 
sions from  one  watershed  to  another  are  commonly  made  in  both  States  and  the  practice 
is  recognized  by  the  decisions  of  their  courts.  Coffin  r.  Left  Hand  Ditch  Co.  (6  Colo. 
443,  449);  Thomas  P.  Guiraud  (6  Colo.  530  r.  Hammond  v.  Rose,  i  11  Colo.  524  i;  Oppen- 
lander  v.  Left  Hand  Ditch  Co.  (  IS  Colo.  142.  144  >;  Mover  v.  Preston  <<i  Wvo.  308,  321); 
Wiley  / .  Decker  i  1 1  Wyo.  4!lfi,  o20-o31  I.  And  the  evidence  shows  that  diversions  are 
made  and  recognized  in  both  States  which  in  principle  are  not  distinguishable  from  this, 
that  is.  where  wat  er  is  taken  in  one  State  from  a  watershed  leading  into  the  other  State 
and  conducted  into  a  different  watershed  leading  away  from  that  State,  and  from  which 
she  never  can  receive  any  benefit.  The  principle  of.  such  diversions  being  recognized 
in  both  States,  its  application  to  this  interstate  stream  does  not  in  itself  afford  a  ground 
for  complaint,  unless  the  practice  in  both  be  rejected  in  determining  what,  as  between 
them,  is  reasonable  and  admissible  as  to  this  stream,  which  we  think  should  not  be 
done. 

We  are  thus  brought  to  the  question  of  the  basis  on  which  the  relative  rights  of  these 
Stites  in  the  waters  of  this  interstate  stream  should  be  determined.  Should  the  doc- 
trine of  appropriation,  which  each  recognizes  and  enforces  within  her  borders,  be 
applied'?'  Or  is  there  another  basis  which  is  more  consonant  with  right  and  equity? 

The  lands  in  both  States  are  naturally  arid  and  the  need  for  irrigation  is  the  same  in 
one  as  in  the  other.    The  lands  were  settled  under  the  same  public  land  laws  and  their     f 
settlement  was  induced  largely  by  the  prevailing  right  to  divert  and  use  water  for  irri- 
gation, without  which  the  lands  were  of  little  value.    Many  of  the  lands  were  acquired 
under  the  deeert  land  act  which  made  reclamation  by  irrigation  a  condition  to  the 


DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    BASIN.  41 

•acquisition.  The  first  settlers  located  along  the  streams  where  water  could  be  diverted 
and  applied  at  small  cost.  Others  with  more  means  followed  and  reclaimed  lands 
farther  away.  Then  companies  with  large  capital  constructed  extensive  canals  and 
occasional  tunnels  whereby  water  was  carried  to  lands  remote  from  the  stream  and  sup- 
plied, for  hire,  to  settlers  who  were  not  prepared  to  engage  in  such  large  undertakings, 
ritimatley,  the  demand  for  water  being  in  excess  of  the  dependable  flow  of  the  streams 
during  the  irrigation  season,  reservoirs  were  constructed  wherein  water  was  impounded 
when  not  needed  and  released  when  needed,  thereby  measurably  equalizing  the 
natural  flew.  Such  was  the  course  of  irrigation  development  in  both  States.  It  began 
in  territorial  days,  continued  without  change  after  statehood,  and  was  the  basis  for  the 
large  respect  always  shown  for  water  rights.  These  constituted  the  foundation  of  all 
rural  home  building  and  agricultural  development,  and,  if  they  were  rejected  now, 
the  lands  would  return  to  their  naturally  arid  condition,  the  efforts  of  the  settlers  and 
the  expenditures  of  others  would  go  for  naught  and  values  mounting  into  large  figures 
would  be  lost. 

In  neither  State  was  the  right  to  appropriate  water  from  this  interstate  stream  denied . 
On  the  contrary,  it  was  permitted  and  recognized  in  both.  The  rule  was  the  same  on 
both  sides  of  the  line.  Some  of  the  appropriations  were  made  as  much  as  50  years  ago 
and  many  as  much  as  25.  In  the  circumstances  we  have  stated,  why  should  not 
appropriations  from  this  stream  be  respected,  as  between  the  two  States,  according 
to  their  several  priorities,  as  would  be  done  if  the  stream  lay  wholly  within  either 
State?  By  what  principal  of  right  or  equity  may  either  State  proceed  in  disregard 
of  prior  appropriations  in  the^other? 

Colorado  answers  that  this  is  not  a  suit  between  private  appropriators.  This  is 
true,  but  it  does  not  follow  that  their  situation  and  what  has  been  accomplished  by 
them  for  their  respective  States  can  be  ignored.  As  respects  Wyoming  the  welfare, 
prosperity,  and  hapiness  of  the  people  of  the  larger  part  of  the  Laramie  Valley,  as  also 
a  large  portion  of  the  taxable  resources  of  two  counties,  are  dependent  on  the  appro- 
priations in  that  State.  Thus  the  interests  of  the  State  are  indissolubly  linked  with 
the  rights  of  the  appropriators.  To  the  extent  of  the  appropriation  and  use  of  the  water 
in  Colorado  a  like  situation  exists  there. 

Colorado  further  answers  that  she  can  accomplish  more  with  the  water  than  Wyo- 
ming does  or  can :  that  she  proposes  to  use  it  on  lands  in  the  Cache  la  Poundre  Valley, 
and  that  they  with  less  water  will  produce  more  than  the  lands  in  the  portion  of  the 
Laramie  Valley  known  as  the  Laramie  Plains.  It  is  true  that  irrigation  in  the  Poudre 
Valley  has  been  carried  to  a  higher  state  of  development  than  els3whero  in  the  Rocky 
Mountain  region  and  that  the  lands  of  that  valley  Ue  at  a  lower  altitude  than  do  those 
in  the  Laramie  Plains  and  generally  are  better  adapted  to  agriculture.  In  some 
parts  they  also  reqiiire  less  water.  It  may  be  assumed  that  the  lands  intended  to  be 
reclaimed  and  irrigated  in  the  Poudre  Valley  conform  to  the  general  standard,  although 
this  is  left  uncertain.  But  for  combined  farming  and  stockraising  those  of  the  Laramie 
Plains  offer  opportunities  and  advantages  which  are  well  recognized.  It  is  to  this 
use  that  they  chiefly  are  devoted.  It  is  a  recognized  and  profitable  industry,  has 
been  carried  on  there  for  many  years  and  is  of  general  economic  value.  Many  of  the 
original  ranchmen  still  are  engaged  in  it,  some  on  the  tracts  where  they  first  settled. 
With  the  aid  of  irrigation  native  hay  of  a  high  quality,  alfalfa.  oats,  and  other  forage 
are  grown  for  winter  feeding,  the  live  stock  being  grazed  most  of  the  year  on  un irrigated 
;<  icas  and  in  the  neighboring  hills  and  mountains.  In  this  way  not  only  are  the  irriirat- 
ed  tracts  made  productive,  but  the  utility  and  value  of  the  grazing  areas  are  greatly 
enhanced.  The  same  industry  is  carried  on  in  the  same  way  in  sections  of  Colorado. 
In  both  States  this  is  a  purpose  for  \vhich  the  right  to  appropriate  water  may  be  exer- 
cise.], and  no  discrimination  is  made  between  it  and  other  firming.  Even  in  this  suit 
Colorado  is  a<se*ti:ig  appropriations  of  this  class  for  4.250  acres  in  the  portion  of  the 
Laramie  Valley  in  that  State,  and  is  claiming  under  them  an  amount  of  water  in  excess 
of  what  she  asserts  will  irrigate  a  like  acreage  in  the  Poudre  Valley. 

Some  of  the  appropriations  from  the  stream  in  Wyoming  are  used  tor  auriculture 
alone.  One  of  the  large  projects,  dating  from  territorial  days,  and  constructed  at 
great  cost,  carries  water  from  the  river  through  a  tunnel  one-half  mile  long  and  canals 
several  miles  in  length  to  the  Wheat  land  district,  where  it  is  used  in  irrigating  :'/>,  000 
acres,  all  of  which  are  very  successfully  and  profitably  farmed  in  small  tracts.  This 
project  uses  one  very  large  and  one  comparatively  small  reservoir  for  storing  v,  ater  and 
equalizing  the  natural  flow. 

We  conclude  that  Colorado's  objections  to  the  doctrine  of  appropriation  as  a  basis 
of  decision  are  not  well  taken,  and  that  it  furnishes  the  onlv  basis  which  is  con>  >nant 
with  the  principles  of  right  and  equity  applicable  to  such  a  controversy  as  this  IB. 
The  cardinal  rule  of  the  doctrine  is  that  priority  of  appropriation  gives  superiori! 
right.  Hai-h  of  these  States  applies  and  enforces  this  rule  in  her  own  territory,  and  it 
is  the  one  to  which  intending  appropriators  naturally  v.ould  turn  for  guidance.  The 


42  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASTX. 

principle  on  which  it  proceeds  is  not  less  applicable  to  interstate  streams  and  contro- 
versies than  to  others.  Both  States  pronounce  the  rule  just  and  reasonable  us  applied 
to  the  natural  conditions  jn  that  region;  and  to  prevent  any  departure  from  it  the  people 
of  1  "ill  incorporated  it  into  their  constitutions.  It  originated  in  the  customs  and 
usages  of  the  people  before  either  State  came  into  existence,  and  the  courts  of  both 
hold  that  their  constitutional  provisions  me  to  1  e  taken  as  recognizing  the  prior  usage 
rather  than  as  creating  a  new  rule.  These  considerations  persuade  us  that  its  appliea- 
tion  to  such  a  controversy  as  is  here  presented  can  not  be  other  than  eminently  just 
and  equitable  to  all  concerned. 

In  suits  between  appropriators  from  the  same  stream,  but  in  different  States  recog- 
nizing the  doctrine  of  appropriation,  the  question  whether  rights  under  such  appro- 
priations should  be  judged  by  the  rule  of  priority  has  been  considered  by  several 
courts,  State  and  Federal,  and  has  been  unifounly  answered  in  the  affirmative. 
Conant  v.  Deep  Creek  Irrigation  Co.  (23  Utah  f>27,  681);  Willey  v.  Decker  i  11  Wyo. 
496,  534-535);  Taylor  r.  Hulett  (15  Idaho  265,  271);  Howell  r.  Johnson  (89  Fed.  51 
Hoge  r.  Eaton  (135  Fed.  411):  Morris  v.  Bean  i]46  Fed.  -123 r.  Bean  v.  Morris  (159 
Fed.  651).  One  of  the  cases  came  to  this  court,  and  the  judgment  below  was 
affirmed.  Morris  r.  Bean  (221  U.  S.  485.)  These  decisions,  although  given  in  suits 
between  individuals,  tend  strongly  to  support  our  conclusion,  for  they  show  that  by 
common  usage,  as  also  by  judicial  pronouncement,  the  rule  of  priority  is  regarded 
in  such  States  as  having  the  same  application  to  a  stream  flowing  from  one  of  them 
to  another  that  it  has  to  streams  wholly  within  one  of  them. 

The  remaining  questions  are  largely  matters  of  fact.  The  evidence  is  voluminous, 
some  of  it  highly  technical  and  some  quite  conflicting.  It  has  all  been  considered. 
The  reasonable  limits  of  an  opinion  do  not  admit  of  its  extended  discussion.  We 
must  be  content  to  give  our  conclusions  on  the  main  questions  and  make  such  refer- 
ences to  and  comment  on  what  is  evidential  as  will  point  to  the  grounds  on  which 
the  conclusions  on  those  questions  rest:  As  to  minor  questions,  we  can  only  state 
the  ultimate  facts  as  we  find  them  from  the  evidence. 

The  question  first  in  order,  and  the  one  most  difficult  of  solution,  relates  to  the 
flow  of  the  Laramie  River,  the  common  source  of  supply.  The  difficulty  arises 
chiefly  out  of  the  fact  that  the  flow  varies  greatly  in  the  course  of  the  year  and  also 
from  year  to  year. 

Colorado's  evidence,  which  for  convenience  we  take  up  first,  is  din  et<  d  to  show- 
ing the  average  yearly  flow  of  all  years  in  a  considerable  period,  as  if  that  constituted 
a  proper  measure  of  the  available  supply.  We  think  it  is  not  a  proper  measure,  and 
this  because  of  the  great  variation  in  the  flow.  To  bo  available  in  a  practical  s^nse, 
the  supply  must  be  fairly  continuous  and  dependable.  No  doubt  the  natural  How 
can  be  materially  conserved  and  equali/.ed  by  means  of  stn:.  but  this 

has  its  limitations,  both  financial  and  physical.  The  construction  of  reservoirs  of 
real  capacity  is  attended  with  great  expense,  and  unless  an  adequate  return  reasonahly 
can  be  foreseen  the  expenditure  is  not  justified  and  will  not  be  made.  The  years  of 
high  water  and  those  of  low  do  not  alternate.  Often  several  of  the  same  kind  follow 
in  succession.  The  evaporation  of  stored  water  in  Colorado  and  Wyoming  is  from 
5  to  6  feet  per  year.  So,  while  it  generally  is  practicable  to  store  water  in  one  part 
of  the  year  for  us?  in  another,  or  in  one  year  for  us^  in  the  next,  it  oft°n.  if  not  gen- 
erally, is  impracticable  to  store  it  for  longer  periods.  All  this  is  recognized  elsewhere 
in  Colorado's  evidence.  One  of  her  principal  witnesses  said: 

"With  re.gard  to  financial  practicability  of  construction  of  r  -s-rvoii-s  on  Poudre 
River  capable  of  conserving  extraordinary  floods,  will  state  that  they  call  for  an 
expenditure  that  could  be  utilized  only  occasionally.  It  would  be  similar  to  finan- 
cial proposition  of  people  in  Florida  preparing  to  heat  their  houses  in  the  same  man- 
ner as  those  in  the  northern  part  of  the  United  States.  For  years  of  unusually  high 
flow  in  the  Poudre  River  conservation  works  to  utilize  the  excess  \vat  -rs  in  that 
stream  would  have  to  count  on  carrying  wat<>r  over  more  than  one  year.  The  utili/.a- 
tion  of  this  water  means  the  presence  of  population  on  the  land:  that  population  must 
have  a  living  from  year  to  year,  and  they  are  not  justified  in  going  out  on  the  land 
and  settling  to  raise  a  crop  only  once  in  three  or  lour  years.  Th°y  must  have  suffi- 
cient to  make  a  living  from  one  year  to  another,  and  consequently  the  investment 
must  be  such  that  there  can  be  sufficient  water  every  year  to  keep  th.-s-.-  people  on 
the  land,  and  when  water  can  only  be  conserved  once  in  every  three  to  live  years 
there  must  be  provision  for  carrying  over  water  or  the  people  can  not  live.  It  is  a 
question  of  population  as  well  as  investment.  The  population  has  to  exist  and  stay 
on  the  ground.  From  standpoint  of  investment,  conservation  of  flow  such  as  extreme 
flow  of  1884  would  be  impractical  to  the  extent  that  it  exceeded  the  ordinary  high 
year.  Of  such  character  would  be  [also]  the  floods  of  1885,  1900,  and  1900,  three 
[four]  years  in  thirty."  The  witness  further  said:  "Aside  from  reasons  which  I  have 
given  why  reservoirs  designed  to  catch  only  these  rare  high  water  flows  of  Poudre 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 


43 


River  are  not  feasible,  it  is  a  fact  that  no  farmer  would  be  able  to  anticipate  the  high 
flow  and  therefore  could  not  depend  at  all  upon  water  for  irrigation  until  it  reached 
him.  If  he  undertook  to  so  divert  water,  it  would  become  a  gamble  rather  than  a 
safe  guide  for  living." 

Another  of  her  witnesses  .-aid: 

"The  present  storage  capacity  in  the  Poudre  Valley  is  such  that  in  some  years 
the  reservoirs  are  not  all  filled,  while  in  some  years  they  are  filled  and  water  runs  to 
waste.  *  *  *  It  would  not  be  possible  to  inaugurate  a  scheme  in  the  Poudre  Valley 
to  construct  reservoirs  to  store  water  from  one  year  of  high  flow  to  another  where  such 
water  is  the  only  source  of  supply,  for  the  reservoirs  would  have  to  be  constructed 
to  hold  the  maximum  amount,  and  if  the  water  has  to  be  carried  over  for  three  years 
the  average  diversion  from  the  reservoir  would  be  only  one-third  of  its  capacity, 
making  the  cost  per  acre  prohibitive." 

And  still  another  of  her  witnesses,  referring  to  the  unused  waters  of  the  Poudre 
in  years  of  hi<rh  flow  and  also  to  what  is  contemplated  by  the  defendants  is  respect 
of  the  Laramie,  said: 

"The  really  dependable  water  supply  of  the  district  :  will  come  from  the  Laramie 
River,  the  amount  secured  from  the  Poudre  River  fluctuating  greatly  and  being  used 
to  augment  the  supply  from  the  Laramie.  There  will  be  years  when  the  supply  from 
the  Poudre  River  and  its  tributaries  will  be  practically  nothing.  Our  plans  contem- 
plate taking  all  the  water  that  it  is  possible  for  us  to  take  from  the  Laramie  River 
each  year.  It  is  possible  to  get  only  a  certain  amount  from  that  river,  and  I  do  not 
believe  that  we  can  absolutely  depend  on  more  than  half  the  required  amount  from 
the  Laramie  River.  The  very  great  floods  on  that  watershed  we  can  not  consider 
because  we  can  not  construct  works  to  take  care  of  them." 

In  accord  with  these  statements,  bearing  on  what  is  susceptible  of  use  in  actual 
practice,  is  further  evidence  coming  from  Colorado's  witnesses  and  exhibits  to  the 
"effect  that,  notwithstanding  the  great  need  for  water  in  the  Poudre  Valley  and  the 
returns  obtained  from  its  use,  large  amounts  of  water  pass  down  the  stream  without 
use  or  impounding  in  the  years  when  the  flow  exceeds  what  is  termed  the  average. 
With  the  high  state  of  irrigation  development  in  that  valley  the  full  capacity  of  the 
reservoir  system  there  provided  when  the  proof  was  taken  was  146,655  acre-feet — 
an  evidence  of  the  limitation  inhering  in  the  practical  storage  of  water  from  such 
streams. 

The  Cache  la  Poudre  River  heads  in  the  same  mountain  range  as  does  the  Laramie 
and  the  conditions  which  make  for  a  pronounced  variation  in  the  natural  flow  are 
largely  the  same  with  both.  The  following  table  compiled  from  data  relating  to  the 
Cache  la  Poudre,  furnished  by  Colorado,  will  be  helpful  in  illustrating  the  view  of 
the  witnesses,  and  also  ours.  We  add  the  third  and  fourth  columns. 

in  annual  net  discharge  of  Cache  la  Poudre  River,  April  to  October,  both 
inclusive,  for  30  years. 

[Taken  from  Colorado's  Exhibit  124.] 


Year. 

Run-off 
in 

acre-feet. 

Variance 
from 
average 
of  all. 

Variance 
from 
average 
of  all 
but  4. 

Year. 

Run-off 

in 
acre-  feet. 

Variance 
from 
average 
of  all. 

Variance 
from 
average 
of  all 
but  4. 

1884 

666  466 

+369  144 

1899 

388  591 

+91  269 

+  126  008 

4'>."i.  47.1 

1900 

i7i  57  ; 

+  177  251 

+  211  990 

.   . 

1901 

1887 

-10  482 

4-24  ".".7 

1902 

-  1  10,  947 

1888  

1889.   .   .   . 

IVi  W> 

-141.35-' 
—  I!'-  ••'(!•' 

-77  B2S 

1903  
1904 

31  o  437 

-    17.  V.N 

+  18  115 

+  82,567 

1890 

To   >99 

41  .KU> 

1905 

:  ;t;i   li.V 

+  99  069 

IV.tl. 

—  .1  :-!47 

1906 

279  974 

+  17  391 

1892  

1907     ... 

386.  224 

1908 

-11   I7'i 

—  9  740 

IV.)}  

309,444 

J-ll?  li!.' 

•  r>  vii 

1909      .    . 

}vi   IK)' 

-    I.SS.  I'.VI 

1895. 

:-'41  .vxi 

-47  17^ 

191(1 

1.17   ">1  1 

H't;  

-100  24! 

1911 

-91.711 

1897 

1912 

1,898  

-90,29$ 

1913 

L'17.  9.V.I 

—  79.363 

Average  297.322,  including  all  years. 

Average  362,583,  omitting  1S84, 1885, 1900,  and  1909. 

1  The  ref .renre  is  to  the  Grieley-Poudre  ir.igalion  diflrict,  one  of  the  defen  : 


44 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO    RIVKR    BASIX. 


This  table  shows  that  during  30  years — 1884  to  1913 — the  yearly  flow  of  the  Cache 
la  Poudre  ranged  from  15l.*i;;ii  to  666,466  acre-feet,  that  in  16  of  the  30  it  fell  below 
the  average,  and  that  S  of  the  Hi  were  in  immediate  succession.  Obviously.it  is 
not  financially  practicable,  even  by  means  of  reservoirs,  to  equalize  the  flow  of  a 
stream  subject  to  such  variation  so  that  it  will  have  a  fairly  constant  and  dependable 
flow  at  the  average  of  all  years.  For  further  illustration  we  have  taken  the  average 
of  the  23  years  remaining  after  excluding  the  4  described  by  the  witness  as  extra- 
ordinary (these  being  left  to  take  the  average  of  the  others)  and  on  that  basis  have 
made  a  computation  of  the  excess  and  deficiency,  which  is  shown  in  the  fourth 
column  of  the  table.  Even  on  this  basis  there  were  13  yea  is  in  which  the  flow  \v:is 
below  the  average  and  of  these  6  came  in  immediate  succession.  In  four  the  de- 
ficiency exceeded  100,000  acre-feet  and  of  the  four  only  one  followed  a  year  in  which 
there  was  an  excess  sufficient,  if  carried  over  in  storage,  to  cover  the  deficiency. 
This  suffices  to  show  thaf  the  average  of  all  years  is  far  from  being  a  proper  or  safe 
measure  of  the  available  supply.  An  intending  irrigator  acquiring  a  water  right 
based  on  such  a  measure  would  be  almost  certainly  confronted  with  drought  when 
his  need  for  water  was  greatest.  Crops  can  not  be  grown  on  expectations  of  average 
flows  which  do  not  come,  nor  on  recollections  of  unusual  flows  which  have  pas-r-d 
down  the  stream  in  prior  years.  Only  when  the  water  is  actually  applied  does  the 
soil  respond . 

We  have  dealt  with  the  matter  of  the  average  flow  at  this  length  because  throughout 
Colorado's  evidence  and  in  her  briefs  it  is  treated  as  if  it  were  a  proper  measure  of 
the  supply  available  for  practical  use.  It  is  there  applied  to  the  Laramie  not  only 
directly,  but  indirectly  by  increasing  the  gauged  flow  for  a  particular  year  or  period 
by  percentages  derived  by  comparing  the  How  of  the  Poudre  for  that  year  or  period 
with  the  average  for  the  30  years,  including  those  in  which  the  flow  was  so  extra- 
ordinary that  concededly  much  of  it  neither  was  nor  could  be  used.  Thus,  water 
which  is  not  part  of  the  available  supply  is  counted  in  measuring  that  supply. 

When  the  evidence  was  taken,  in  1913  and  1914.  the  Laramie  had  not  been  gauged 
so  thoroughly  nor  for  so  long  a  period  as  had  the  Cache  la  Poudre.  Such  gauging  as 
had  occurred  had  been  done  at  different  places  in  different  periods,  paitly  by  the 
United  States  Geological  Survey,  partly  by  Colorado  and  partly  by  Wyoming.  Some 
of  the  gauging  stations  were  in  Colorado,  but  most  were  in  Wyoming.  The  latter 
included  Woods,  9  miles  north  of  the  State  boundary,  and  the  Pioneer  Dam,  4  miles 
north  of  Woods.  The  evidence  centered  largely  around  the  flow  and  gauging  at 
these  places.  Colorado's  chief  witness  prepared  and  presented  a  table  based  on  data,, 
drawn  from  various  sources,  and  bearing  on  the  flow  at  Woods  from  April  to  October, 
both  inclusive,  for  several  years  and  made  this  table  the  principal  basis  of  his  te.-ti- 
mony  concerning  the  flow  of  the  stream  in  that  vicinity.  We  here  reproduce  the 
material  part  of  the  table,  the  third  and  fourth  columns  being  ours: 

Discharge  of  Laramie  River,  Woods,  Wyo.,  April  to  October,  both  inclusive,  for  9  years. 
[Taken  from  Colorado's  Exhibit  127.] 


Variance 

Variance 

Variance 

from 

Variance 

from 

Year. 

Acre-feet. 

from 

average 

Year. 

Acre-feet. 

from 

average 

average. 

of  all 

average. 

of  all 

but  1899. 

but  1899. 

1895.  .  . 

220.239 

+21,694 

+45,  730 

1900... 

LMs.  lie, 

+49,560 

+73,596- 

1896 

108  022 

-90,523 

—66  487 

1911 

IMS  240 

-60,305 

—36  269 

1897  

251,074 

+  52,529 

+  76,565 

1912  

213,  407 

+  14,862 

+38,898- 

1898  

117,765 

-80,780 

-56,744 

1913  

99,  221 

-99,324 

-75,288. 

1899  

390,730 

+  192,185 

+  216,221 

Average,  198,533,  incluling  all  years. 
Average,  174,509,  excluding  1899. 

The  data  covered  two  widely  separated  periods,  one  of  six  years  and  the  other  of 
three.  The  witness  took  the  average  of  the  nine  years,  which  he  gave  as  198,545 
acre-feet,  and  made  this  the  basis  of  further  calculations.  He  estimated  that  the 
usual  flow  for  the  other  months  was  one-tenth  of  that  for  the  full  year,  or,  putting  it 
in  another  way,  one-ninth  of  that  from  April  to  October,  both  inclusive,  and  on  this 
basis  he  added  to  his  average  21,945  acre-feet,  making  220,490.  Consulting  the  Cache 
la  Poudre  table,  set  forth  above,  he  concluded  that  the  nine  years,  in  combination,  fell 
below  the'full  average  for  the  30  years  covered  by  that  table,  and  to  bring  the  9  years 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  45 

m>  to  a  30-year  average  he  added  9,510  acre-feet,  making  230,000.  Some  water  from 
Wyoming  enters  the  river  between  the  State  boundary  and  Woods,  and  for  this  he 
deducted  13,000  acre-feet,  leaving  217. "00.  Then,  making  a  reservation  as  to  Sand 
Creek,  to  be  considered  presently,  he  concluded  that  217,000  acre-feet  was  the  average 
yearly  flow  in  that  section  of  the  river.  He  called  it  the  "normal"  flow,  an  evident 
misnomer.  Thi*  did  not  include  water  diverted  in  Colorado,  under  recognized  Col- 
orado appropriations,  which  does  not  reach  Wyoming. 

Even  if  the  computation  was  to  be  made  along  the  lines  of  something  approaching 
a  general  average,  we  think  the  witness's  computation  and  conclusion  are  subject  to 
objection  in  particulars  which  we  proceed  to  state. 

The  table  shows  that  the  flow  for  1899  was  extraordinary,  so  much  so  that  it  should 
have  been  excluded  in  computing  the  average  and  left  to  take  the  general  level  of 
the  others.  Its  flow  was  2 Hi. 221  acre-feet  in  excess  of  their  average.  The  excess 
added  nothing  to  the  available  supply — that  which  in  practice  could  be  used.  The 
flow  for  the  next  year  was  such  that  it  required  no  augmentation  from  1899.  So 
the  inclusion  of  1899  in  the  computation  was,  in  effect,  taking  what  was  not  available 
as  a  measure  of  what  was.  The  error  raised  the  average  of  the  other  years  24,036  acre- 
feet  and  was  carried  into  the  ultimate  conclusion. 

We  do  not  doubt  that  it  was  admissible  to  compare  the  data  relating  to  the  Laramie 
with  that  relating  to  the  Cache  la  Poudre  and  to  give  effect  to  such  conclusions  as 
reasonably  were  to  be  drawn  from  the  comparison,  but  we  think  there  was  no  justifi- 
cation for  the  addition  which  was  made  to  bring  the  nine  years  up  to  the  standard 
of  an  average  year  among  the  30  covered  by  the  Cache  la  Poudre  table.  The  addition 
tended  to  distort  rather  than  to  reflect  the  available  supply.  Looking  at  the  Cache  la 
Poudre  table,  it  is  evident  that  the  9  years,  in  combination,  would  not  have  appeared 
short  in  flow  had  the  4  extraordinary  years  in  the  30  been  excluded,  as  they  should 
have  been.  Besides,  a  comparison  of  the  two  tables  shows  that  the  variation  in  yearly 
flow  in  the  two  streams  is  not  the  same  and  that  the  difference  is  such  as  to  preclude 
a  nice  calculation  such  as  was  here  made  on  the  basis  of  an  assumed  uniformity.  To 
illustrate:  According  to  one  table  the  flow  of  the  Poudre  from  April  to  October,  both 
inclusive^  in  1900  was  85,982  acre-feet  in  excess  of  that  for  the  same  months  in  1899, 
while  according  to  the  other  the  flow  of  the  Laramie  for  those  months  in  1899  was 
142,625  acre-feet  in  excess  of  that  for  the  corresponding  period  in  1900;  and  according 
to  one  table  the  flow  of  the  Poudre  for  those  months  in  1913  was  73.2  per  cent  of  that 
for  the  same  part  of  1912,  while  according  to  the  other  the  flow  of  the  Laramie  for  those 
months  in  1913  was  46.5  per  cent  of  that  for  the  same  part  of  1912. 

Assuming  that  13,000  acre-feet  enter  the  river  from  Wyoming  between  the  State 
boundary  and  Woods,  and  are  put  of  the  river  at  the  latter  point,  we  think  this  water 
should  not  have  been  deducte:!.  It  is  part  of  the  supply  available  to  satisfy  appro- 
priations from  the  stream  in  Wyoming. 

The  witness  treated  the  flow  irom  April  to  October,  both  inclusive,  in  1912  as 
being  213.407  acre-feet,  and  the  flow  in  the  same  months  in  1913  as  being  99.221  acre- 
feet.  In  this  we  think  he  erred.  The  evidence  establishes  that  the  flow  in  the  first 
period  was  not  more  than  191,820  acre-feet  and  in  the  second  was  not  more  than 
94,369.  Even  with  the  year  1899  excluded,  this  error  increased  the  average  3.305 
acre-feet. 

If  we  exclude  the  extraordinary  flow  of  1899.  make  the  needed  correction  in  the 
flow  of  1912  and  1913.  and  assume  the  accuracy  of  the  other  data,  the  average  becomes 
171,204  acre-feet,  instead  of  198,545.  as  given  by  the  witness.  This  requires  that  the 
21.945  acre-feet  which  were  added  to  cover  the  flow  for  the  five  other  months  be 
reduced  to  19.023. 

When  these  corrections  are  made  in  the  witness's  data  and  computation,  the  result 
is  changed  from  217.000  acre-feet  to  190.227. 

But  we  are  of  opinion  that  the  computation  and  conclusion  of  the  witness,  even 
when  revised  in  the  way  we  have  indicated,  are  based  too  much  on  the  average  flow 
and  not  enough  on  the  unalterable  need  for  a  supply  which  is  fairly  constant  and 
dependable,  or  is  susceptible  of  being  made  so  by  storage  and  conservation  within 
practicable  limits.  15y  this  it  is  not  meant  that  known  conditions  must  be  such  as 
give  assurance  that  there  will  be  no  deficiency  even  during  long  periods,  but  rather 
that  a  supply  which  is  likely  to  be  intermittent,  or  to  be  matoii.'lly  deficient  ;it  rela- 
tively short  intervals,  does  not  meet  the  test  of  practical  availability.  As  we  under- 
stand it.  substantial  stability  in  the  supply  is  essential  to  successful  reclamation  and 
irrigation.  The  evidence  shows  that  this  is  so.  and  it  is  fully  recognized  in  the  litera- 
ture on  the  subject. 

The  same  witness  prepared  and  submitted  another  table  embodying  all  the  data 
he  was  able  to  secure  from  records  of  past  paging  and  measurements  at  Woods.  This 
included  three  years  not  shown  in  the  nine-year  table.  They  and  their  recorded 


46 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN". 


flow  from  April  to  October,  both  inclusive,  were:  1899,  132,349  acre-feet;  1890,  168,406 
acre-feet,  and  1891,  207,146  acre-feet.  The  witness  pronounced  the  data  for  these  years 
less  accurate  than  that  for  the  others,  and,  while  his  reason  for  doing  so  does  not  clearly 
appear,  we  shall  assume  he  was  right.  Had  the  three  years  been  included  in  the  nine- 
year  table  that  would  have  reduced  the  average  from  198,545  to  189,371  acre-feet, 
counting  all  years,  and  from  174,509  to  171,066  acre-feet,  counting  all  but  1899.  It. 
however.  wrould  not  have  shown  another  year  with  a  flow  as  low  as  that  of  1913,  nor  i 
as  low  as  that  of  1896. 

Colorado  presented  other  evidence  in  the  way  of  general  estimates,  results  of  very 
fragmentary  gaging,  and  opinions  based  on  rough  measurements  of  snow-drifts  in  the 
mountainous  area  about  the  head  of  the  stream;  but  we  put  all  of  this  aside  as  being  of 
doubtful  probative  value  at  best  and  far  less  persuasive  than  the  evidence  we  have 
been  discussing. 

Wyoming's  evidence  was  based  on  the  same  recorded  data  that  were  used  by 
Colorado,  and  also  on  actual  gaging  and  measurements  by  an  experienced  hydrographer 
covering  the  period  beginning  April  1,  1912,  and  ending  April  30,  1914.  Shortly 
stated,  her  evidence  was  to  the  effect  that  the  actual  measured  flow  at  the  Pioneer 
Dam,  four  miles  below  Woods,  was  198,867  acre-feet  from  April  to  December,  both 
inclusive,  in  ]912.  was  109,593  acre-feet  for  all  of  1914  and  was  19,181  acre-feet  for  the 
first  four  months  of  1914;  that  the  flow  for  1912  was  somewhat  above  the  average. 
counting  all  years;  that  the  flow  for  1913  was  somewhat  more  than  fifty  per  cent  .of 
the  average,  and  that  the  average  at  Woods  and  in  that  vicinity,  counting  all  years, 
was  approximately  200,000  acre-feet.  Wyoming's  chief  witness,  the  hydrographer. 
submitted  the  following  table,  giving  the  results  of  his  gaging  and  measurements  at 
the  Pioneer  Dam: 

Discharge  of  Laramie  River  at  Pioneer  Dam,  near  Woods,  Wyo,  (incln<lii/rj  f/lnrsion  just 
above  dam  by  Pioneer  Canal)  in  acre-ful . 


1912 

1SJ13 

1914 

January 

2  6.50 

3  2-:S 

February  .   . 

•2.  356 

3,088 

March  .  .".  

3,296 

4,003 

April             .             .   .                 .             

.'.   "Mi 

rj  'in 

8,807 

Mav.   . 

40,643 

38,307 

June.  . 

91  874 

"li  .V.i- 

July           

:u  ->;:; 

r,  825 

August 

7  809 

3  130 

September...     .          .       ...                 

1   :\\\ 

3,023 

October 

6  4.Vi 

:•',  si.' 

November           ...                    .                                                             .   . 

I  4(« 

'.<>  077 

December  

3,246 

Total      ....                 

198,  867 

109.  593 

19,  LSI 

The  evidence  does  not  permit  us  to  doubt  the  accuracy  of  these  data.  They  were 
obtained  by  work  which  is  shown  to  have  been  painstakenly  and  conscientiously 
done  by  one  fully  competent  to  do  it.  The  place  at  which  it  was  done  was  well 
adapted  to  obtaining  accurate  results,  and  the  observations  were  continuous,  not 
merely  occasional  or  intermittent. 

As  the  gauging  did  not  cover  the  first  three  months  of  1912,  it  is  necessary  to  arrive 
at  the  flow  for  those  months.  The  proof  shows  that  the  flow  for  the  same  months  in 
1914  fairly  may  be  taken  for  the  purpose.  That  was  10,374  acre-feet,  the  addition 
making  209,241  acre-feet  for  1912.  The  flow  for  1913  was  109,593  acre-feet.  Both 
should  be  increased  4,000  acre-feet  to  cover  water  diverted  between  Woods  'and  the 
Pioneer  Dam  and  not  returning  to  the  stream  above  the  gauging  station.  This  Drives 
a  total  of  213,241  acre-feet  for  1912  and  113,593  acre-feet  for  1913.  Tested  by  the  flow 
of  these  years,  the  available  supply  would  be  163,417  acre-feet;  that  is  to  say,  on  that 
basis  the  excess  in  1912  would  match  the  deficiency  in  1913.  But  a  survey  of  more 
than  two  years  is  essential  in  arriving  at  a  fair  conclusion  respecting  the  available 
supply.  A  year  of  low  flow  is  not  always  preceded  by  one  of  high  or  moderate  flow  as 
was  the  case  with  1912  and  1913. 

In  diverting  and  applying  water  in  irrigation  there  is  a  material  loss  through  evapo- 
ration, seepage,  and  otherwise  which  is  inavoidable.     The  amount  varies  according 
to  the  conditions — chiefly  according  to  the  distance  the  water  is  carried  through  canals/^ 
and  ditches  and  the  length  of  time  it  is  held  in  storage.     Where  the  places  of  use  are* 
in  the  same  watershed  and  relatively  near  the  stream,  as  is  true  of  the  lands  on  the 


DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER    BASIN.  47 

Laramie  Plains  served  by  the  greater  part  of  the  Wyoming  appropriations,  a  substantial 
amount  of  water  percolates  back  into  the  stream  from  irrigated  areas  and  becomes 
available  for  further  use  lower  down  the  stream.  This  is  called  return  water.  The 
amount  varies  considerably,  and  there  is  no  definite  data  on  the  subject.  As  respects 
irrigation  on  the  Laramie  Plains  above  the  Wheatland  diversion,  the  evidences 
es  us  that  the  return  water  will  certainly  more  than  counterbalance  the  loss 
throughout  evaporation  and  otherwise  when  the  period  of  storage  is  not  more  than  from 
one  year  to  the  next. 

What  has  now  been  said  covers  the  substance  of  the  evidence,  as  we  regard  it,  bear- 
ing on  the  available  supply  at  Woods  and  in  that  vicinity:  that  is  to  say,  the  supply 
remaining  after  the  recognized  Colorado  appropriations  are  satisfied. 

We  already  have  indicated  that,  as  to  such  a  stream  as  this,  the  average  flow  of  all 
years,  high  and  low.  can  not  be  taken  as  a  proper  or  reasonable  measure  of  what  is 
available  for  practical  use.  What  th^n  is  the  amount  which  is  available  here?  Ac- 
cording to  the  general  consensus  of  opinion  among  practical  irrigators  and  experi- 
enced irrigation  engineers,  the  lowest  natural  flow  of  the  years  is  not  the  test.  In 
practice  they  proceed  on  the  view  that  within  limits,  financially  and  physically 
feasible,  a  fairlv  constant  and  dependable  flow  materiallv  in  excess  of  the  lowest  may 
generally  be  obtained  by  means  of  reservoirs  adapted  to  conserving  and  equalizing 
the  natural  flow;  and  we  regard  this  view  as  reasonable. 

But  Wyoming  takes  the  position  that  she  should  not  be  required  to  provide  storage 
facilities  in  order  that  Colorado  may  obtain  a  larger  amount  of  water  from  the  common 
supply  than  otherwise  would  be  possible.  In  a  sense  this  is  true;  but  not  to  the  extent 
of  requiring  that  the  lowest  natural  flow  be  taken  as  the  test  of  the  available  supply. 
The  question  here  is  not  what  one  State  should  do  for  the  other,  but  how  each  should 
exercise  her  relative  rights  in  the  waters  of  this  interstate  stream.  Both  are  interested 
in  the  stream  and  both  have  great  need  for  the  water.  Both  subscribe  to  the  doctrine 
of  appropriation,  and  by  that  doctrine  rights  to  water  are  measured  by  what  is  reason- 
ably required  and  applied.  Both  States  reco?nize  that  conservation  within  practi- 
cable limits  is  essential  in  order  that  needless  waste  may  be  prevented  and  the  largest 
feasible  use  may  be  secured.  This  comports  with  the  all-pervading  spirit  of  the  doc- 
trine of  appropriation  and  takes  appropriate  heed  of  the  natural  necessities  out  of 
which  it  arose.  We  think  that  doctrine  lays  on  each  of  these  States  a  duty  to  exercise 
her  right  reasonably  and  in  a  manner  calculated  to  conserve  the  common  supply. 
Notwithstanding  her  present  contention.  Wyoming  has  in  fact  proceeded  on  this 
line,  for,  as  the  proof  shows,  her  appropriators,  with  her  sanction,  have  provided  and 
have  in  service  reservoir  facilities  which  are  adapted  for  the-  purpose  and  reasonably 
sufficient  to  meet'its  requirements. 

There  is  one  respect,  requiring  mention,  in  which  Colorado's  situation  differs  ma- 
teriallv from  that  of  Wyoming.  The  water  to  satisfy  the  Colorado  appropriations 
is,  and  in  the  nature  of  things  must  be.  diverted  in  Colorado  at  the  head  of  the  stream; 
and  because  of  this  those  appropriations  will  not  be  a/fected  by  any  variation  in 
the  yearly  flow,  but  will  receive  their  full  measure  of  water  in  all  years.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  Wyoming  appropriations  will  receive  the  water  only  after  it  passes 
down  into  that  Stale,  and  must  bear  whatever  of  risk  is  incident  to  the  variation  in 
the  natural  flow.  Of  course,  this  affords  no  reason  for  underestimating  the  available 
supply,  but  it  does  show  that  to  overestimate  it  will  work  particular  injury  to  Wyo- 
ming. 

The  lowest  established  flow  was  that  of  1913.  There  is  no  claim  or  proof  that  in 
any  other  year  the  flow  fell  so  low.  Had  there  been  others  some  proof  of  it  doubtless 
would  have  been  presented.  This  is  also  true  of  the  very  low  flow  of  1896.  There- 
fore we  think  it  reasonably  may  be  assumed  that  the  flow  of  those  years  was  so  ex- 
ceptional that  it  is  not  likelv  to  recur  save  at  long  intervals. 

We  conclude,  in  view  of  all  the  evidence  and  of  the  several  considerations  we  have 
stated,  that  the  natural  and  vardn-r  flow  of  this  stream  at  Woods,  which  is  after  the 
recogized  Colorado  appropriations  are  satisfied,  is  susceptible  by  means  of  prac-. 
ticable  storage  and  conservation  of  being  converted  into  a  fairly  constant  and  depend 
able  flow  of  170,000  acre-feat  per  year,  but  not  more.     This  we  hold  to  be  the  avail 
able  supply  at  that  paint  after  the  recognized  Colorado  diversions  are  made.     The 
amount  may  scorn  large,  but,  considering  what  naav  be  accomplished  with  practicable 
storage  f  i  -ilitie-,  such  a*  are  already  prodded,  and  the  use  which  may  be  made  of  the 
return  water,  we  are  persuaded  that  the  amount,  while  closely  pressing  the  outside 
limit,  is  not  too  lar. 

131G— 22— PT! 4 


liKVKLOP.MEXT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO   RIVER    BASIX. 


The  problem  to  be  worked  out  in  obtaining  a  fairly  dependable  supply  in  that 
amount  is  measurably  illustrated  by  the  following  table  covering  all  the  years  for 
which  the  evidence  supplies  the  requisite  data,  the  flow  during  the  missing  months 
being  fairly  estimated: 


Year. 

Acre-  feet. 

Variance 
from 
average 
of  all. 

Variance 
from 
average 
of  all 
but  1899. 

Variance 
from 
170,000. 

1889 

151,349 

—56,893 

-38,576 

-18  651 

1890                        

187,406 

-20.836 

-2,  519 

+17,408 

1891 

226,146 

+  17,904 

+36,221 

+56,  146 

1895                                   

239.  239 

+30,997 

+  49,314 

+69,239 

1896 

127,  022 

-81,220 

-62,903 

-42,978 

1897      .                                     

270,074 

+61,831 

+  80,149 

+  100.074 

1898 

136,  765 

-71.477 

-53,  IfiO 

-33,235 

1899                                       '    

409,  730 

+201,488 

-  219,805 

+239,730 

1900 

267,  105 

+  58,863 

+  77,180 

+97,  105 

1911                                  

157,  240 

-51,002 

-32,685 

-12,760 

1912 

213  241 

+  4,999 

+2},  316 

+  43,241 

1913                                     

113,593 

-94,  649 

-76,332 

-56,047 

Average  298.242,  including  all  years. 
Average  189,925,  including  all  years  but  1899. 

It  of  course  is  true  that  the  variation  in  the  flow  will  not  always  be  just  what  it 
was  in  the  years  covered  by  the  table,  and  yet  the  data  obtained  by  the  gaging  and 
measurements  in  those  years  show  better  than  anything  else  what  reasonably  may 
be  expected  in  the  future.  We  recognize  that  the  problem  which  the  table  is  in- 
tended to  illustrate  is  not  a  simple  one  and  that  to  work  it  out  will  involve  the  exer- 
cise of  both  skill  and  care.  But  in  this  it  is  not  unlike  other  problems  of  similar 
moment.  Our  belief  gathered  from  all  the  evidence  is  that,  with  the  attention  which 
rightly  should  be  bestowed  on  a  problem  of  such  moment,  it  can  be  successfully  solved 
within  the  limits  of  what  is  financially  and  physically  practicable. 

As  to  Sand  Creek.  Colorado's  witness  regarded  it  as  a  tributary  of  the  river  and 
estimated  its  yearly  flow  at  17.000  acre-feet.  The  creek  rises  in  Colorado,  extends 
into  the  Laramie  Plains  in  Wyoming,  and  discharges  into  Button  Lake,  a  few  miles 
from  the  river.  In  exceptional  years — about  one  in  five — the  waters  of  the  creek 
overflow  the  lake  for  a  short  period  and  find  their  way  over  the  prairie  into  the  river, 
Otherwise  the  river  receives  no  water  from  the  creek.  The  proof  of  this  is  direct 
and  undisputed.  The  creek  is  nominally  a  tributary  of  the  river,  but  only  that. 
Besides,  its  flow  does  not  appear  to  have  been  measured.  The  witness  merely  esti- 
mated it  at  what  he  thought  would  be  the  natural  run-off  of  the  adjacent  territory. 
Other  evidence  suggests  that  the  estimate  is  too  high,  but  this  we  need  not  consider. 
A  substantial  part  of  the  flow  is  diverted,  through  what  is  known  as  the  Divide  Ditch, 
for  use  in  irrigating  lands  in  Colorado,  and  the  evidence  suggests,  if  it  does  not  estab- 
lish, that  existing  appropriations  in  the  two  States  take  the  entire  flow.  For  these 
reasons  the  waters  of  this  creek  can  not  be  regarded  as  a  factor  in  this  controversy. 

After  passing  Woods,  and  while  traversing  the  territory  wherein  are  the  Wyoming 
appropriations  with  which  we  are  concerned,  the  Laramie  receives  one  large  and 
some  very  small  additions  to  its  waters. 

The  large  addition  comes  from  the  Little  Laramie.  a  stream  whose  source  and 
entire  length  are  in  Wyoming.  Its  natural  now  is  a  little  more  than  one-half  of  that 
of  the  main  stream  at  Woods  and  is  subject  to  much  the  same  variations.  Part  of  its 
flow  is  used  under  appropriations  along  its  course  and  the  remainder  passes  into  the 
main  stream.  Including  what  is  appropriated  along  its  course,  and  excluding  minor 
contributions  by  small  creeks  after  it  gets  well  away  from  its  headwaters,  we  think 
the  amount  available  for  practical  use  is  93.0CO  acre-feet  per  year. 

None  of  the  small  tributaries,  whether  of  the  Laramie  or  the  Little  Laramie.  adds 
much  to  the  available  supply.  Their  natural  flow  is  small.  As  to  some  it  is  all  used 
under  old  appropriations:  as  to  some  it  is  partly  used  under  such  appropriations; 
and  as  to  some  it  is  only  seasonal,  the  channels  being  dry  much  of  the  year.  Some 
creeks  spoken  of  in  Colorado's  evidence  as  tributaries  are  otherwise  shown  not  to  be 
such,  but  to  deliver  their  waters  into  lak(  s  or  ponds  not  connected  with  either  of  the 
principal  streams.  Colorado's  evidence  also  takes  into  account  some  tributaries  which 
discharge  into  the  Laramie  below  the  points  of  diversion  of  all  the  Wyoming  appro- 
priations with  which  we  are  concerned.  One,  of  which  much  is  said  in  the  evidence, 
is  the  Svbille.  It  reaches  the  Laramie  below  the  diversion  for  the  Wheatland  Dis- 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  49 

trict  ''the  lowest  diveision  we  are  to  consider;,  but  in  its  course  passes  through  that 
district.  A  small  part  of  its  flow  is  used  in  that  district  and  it  is  not  practicable  to 
use  more.  What  is  used  should,  for  present  purposes,  be  treated  as  if  it  reached  the 
Laramie  above  the  \\hcatland  diversion.  Wyoming  contends  that  none  of  these 
small  tributaries,  other  than  the  Sybille.  contributes  any  dependable  amount  to  the 
available  supply.  We  think  there  is  in  the  aggregate  a  fairly  dependable  contribu- 
tion of  25.000  acre-feet,  but  not  more. 

It  results  that,  in  ovir  opinion,  the  entire  supply  available  for  the  proposed  Colorado 
appropriation  and  the  Wyoming  appropriations  down  to  and  including  the  diversion 
for  the  Wheatland  district  is  288.000  acre-feet. 

In  contending  for  a  larger  finding,  Colorado  points  to  the  issue  by  Wyoming's  State 
engineer  of  permits,  so-called,  for  appropriations  in  excess  of  that  amount  and  insists 
that  these  permits  constitute  solemn  adjudications  by  that  officer  that  the  supply  is 
adequate  to  cover  them.  But  in  this  the  nature  of  the  permits  is  misapprehended. 
In  fact  and  in  law  they  are  not  adjudications  but  mere  licenses  to  appropriate  if  the 
requisite  amount  of  water  be  there.  As  to  many  nothing  ever  is  done  under  them  by 
the  intending  appropriators.  In  such  cases  there  is  no  appropriation;  and  even  in. 
others  the  amount  of  the  appropriation  turns  on  what  is  actually  done  under  the 
permit.  In  late  years  the  permits  relating  to  these  streams  have  contained  a  pro- 
vision, saying:  "The  records  of  the  State  engineer's  office  show  the  wateis  of  [the 
particular  stream]  to  be  largely  appropriated.  The  appropriator  under  the  permit  is 
hereby  notified  of  this  fact,  and  the  issuance  of  this  permit  grants  only  the  right  to 
divert  and  use  the  surplus  of  waste  water  of  the  stream  and  confers  no  rights  which 
will  interfere  with  or  impair  the  use  of  water  by  prior  appropriators."  It  therefore 
is  plain  that  these  permits  have  no  such  probative  force  as  Colorado  seeks  to  have 
attributed  to  them. 

Colorado  also  comments  on  the  amount  of  water  stored  in  Wyoming  reservoirs  in 
1912  and  seeks  to  draw  from  this  an  inference  that  the  available  supply  was  greater 
than  we  have  indicated.  But  the  inference  is  not  justified,  and  for  these  reasons: 
First,  a  part  of  what  was  stored  wa*  dead  water:  that  is.  was  below  the  level  from  which 
water  could  be  drawn  off  and  conducted  to  the  places  of  use.  This  is  a  matter  com- 
monly experienced  in  the  selection  and  use  of  reservoir  sites.  Secondly,  the  flow  of' 
1912  wa*  above  what  could  be  depended  on  and  prudence  required  that  a  substantial 
part  be  carried  over  to  meet  a  possible  shortage  in  the  succeeding  year.  And,  thirdly, 
the  evidence  shows  that  in  1912  the  storing  process  was  improvidently  carried  to  a 
point  which  infringed  the  rights  of  small  appropriators  who  were  without  storage 
fa'ilities. 

The  available  supply — the  288,000  acre-feet — is  not  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  Wyoming 
appropriations  dependent  thereon  and  also  the  proposed  Colorado  appropriation,  so 
it  becomes  necessary  to  consider  their  relative  priorities. 

There  are  some  existing  Colorado  appropriations  having  priorities  entitling  them  to 
precedence  over  many  of  the  Wyoming  appropriations.  These  recognized  Colorado 
appropriations  are,  18,000  acre-feet  for  what  is  known  as  the  Skyline  Ditch  and  4.250 
acre-feet  for  the  irrigation  of  that  number  of  acres  of  native-hay  meadows  in  the  Lara- 
mie Valley  in  Colorado,  the  4,250  acre-feet  being  what  Colorado's  chief  witness  testifies 
is  reasonably  required  for  the  purpose,  although  a  larger  amount  is  claimed  in  the 
State's  answer.  These  recognized  Colorado  appropriations,  aggregating  22,250  acre- 
feet,  are  not  to  be  deducted  from  the  288,000  acre-feet,  that  being  the  available  supply 
after  they  are  satisfied.  Xor  is  Colorado's  appropriation  from  Sand  Creek  to  be 
deducted,  that  creek,  as  we  have  shown,  not  being  a  tributary  of  the  Laramie. 

The  proposed  Colorado  appropriation  which  is  in  controversy  here,  is  spoken  of  in 
the  evidence  as  the  Laramie-Poudre  Tunnel  diversion  and  is  part  of  an  irrigation 
project  known  as  the  Laramie-Poudre  project.  Colorado  insists  that  this  proposed 
appropriation  takes  priority,  by  relation,  as  of  August  25.  1902,  and  Wyoming  that 
the  priority  can  relate  only  to  the  latter  part  of  1909.  The  true  date  is  a  matter  of 
importance,  because  some  lanre  irrigation  works  were  started  in  Wyoming  between 
the  dates  mentioned,  were  diligently  curried  to  completion,  and  are  entitled  to  priori- 
ties as  of  the  dates  when  they  were  started. 

The  Laramie-Poudre  project  is  composed  of  several  units,  originally  distinct,  which 
underwent  many  changes  before  they  were  brought  together  in  a  single  project.  In 
its  final  form  the  project  is  intended  to  divert  water  by  means  of  a  tunnel  from  the 
Laramie  River  into  the  Poudre  watershed,  there  to  unite  that  water  with  water  taken 
from  the  Cache  la  Poudre  River  and  then  to  convey  the  water  many  miles  to  the  lower 
part  of  the  Poudre  Valley,  where  it  is  to  be  used  in  reclaiming  and  irrigating  a  body 
of  land  containing  125.000  acres.  It  is  a  large  and  ambitious  project  whose  several 
parts,  as  finally  brought  together,  are  adjusted  to  the  attainment  of  that  purpose. 
The  parts  were  separately  conceived,  each  having  a  purpose  of  its  own.  The  project 
now  is  intended  to  draw  on  two  independent  sources  of  supply,  each  in  a  separate 


50  DKYKLOP.MKXT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    UIVF.K    P.ASIX. 

•watershed.1  The  appropriations  are  necessarily  distinct.  Neither  adds  anything  to, 
nor  subtracts  anything  from,  the  status  of  the  other.  We  are  concerned  with  only  one 
of  them. 

The  proposed  tunnel  diversion  from  the  Laramie  was  conceived  as  a  possibility  by 
Wallace  A.  Link  in  1897  and  was  explained  by  him  to  Abraham  I.  Akin  in  the  spring 
of  1902.  Later  in  the  year  they  visited  the  headwaters  of  the  two  streams,  looked  over 
the  ground,  and  agreed  that  Link's  idea  was  a  good  one,  that  the  undertaking  was 
large,  and  that  they  Avere  without  the  means  to  carry  it  through.  They  concluded  to 
promote  the  project  together,  and,  thinking  their  chance-;  of  success  would  be  im- 
proved by  it,  they  also  concluded  to  construct  a  ditch,  known  as  the  Upper  Rawah, 
from  the  Laramie  \ 'alley  to  a  connection  with  an  existing  ditch,  called  the  Skyline, 
and  to  take  water  through  these  ditches  into  the  <'a<-he  la  Pmidre  Valley  and  there 
sell  it.  By  this  they  hoped  to  demonstrate  that  water  wa<  obtainable  from  that 
source  and  to  obtain  money  to  be  used  in  promoting  their  project.  The'  Skyline  was 
a  fair-sized  ditch  leading  over  a  low  part  of  the  divide  to  a  branch  of  the  Poudre,  and 
they  arranged  with  its  owner  for  the  carriage,  on  a  percentage  l>u-is,  of  water  from 
their  ditch  when  constructed.  They  also  conceived  that  the  ditch  could  be  used 
advantageously  in  collecting  and  carrying  water  to  be  sent  through  the  tunnel  if  and 
when  the  tunnel  diversion  was  effected.  In  1902,  beginning  August  iT>,  they  surve;,  ed 
the  line  of  the  Rawah,  and  in  October  of  that  year  filed  a  statement  of  claim  under 
it  in  the  State  engineer's  office.  In  the  statement  they  said  nothing  about  a  tunnel 
diversion  and  made  claim  only  to  the  amount  of  water  expected  to  be  carried  through 
the  Rawah  and  to  the  use  of  certain  lakes  or  natural  reservoirs  for  storage  purj' 
No  work  was  done  on  the  ditch  that  year.  In  1903  they  cleared  some  of  the  land  over 
which  it  was  to  run,  but  did  no  excavating.  In  1904  they  constructed  (>,000  feet  of  the 
ditch  and  did  more  clearing.  No  work  was  done  on  it  in  1905  or  1906.  Further  work 
was  done  in  1907,  and  some  washouts  were  repaired  in  1903.  That  was  the  last  work 
on  the  Rawah.  Much  more  than  one-half  of  the  ditch  was  left  unconsinicted.  Xo 
water  was  delivered  through  it  to  the  Skyline,  nor  was  any  sold  or  used.  Nothing 
appears  to  have  been  done  with  the  lakes  or  natural  reservoirs. 

.  In  1903  Link  and  Akin  gave  to  each  of  three  others  a  one-fifth  share  in  their 
project,  in  return  for  which  the  new  partners  were  to  carry  on  solicitations  to  get 
capitalists  interested  and  to  raise  money.  The  results  of  the  solicitations  were  disap- 
pointing, but  some  investors  were  brought  in  and  became  concerned  about  the  pre- 
liminary plans.  Differences  of  opinion  arose  and  had  to  be  dealt  with.  The  plans 
were  examined  and  reexamined,  alternative  modes  and  places  of  diversion  were 
considered  and  investigated,  particular  features  were  eliminated  and  others  added, 
and  in  1909,  but  not  before,  the  project  was  definitely  brought  into  its  present  form. 
A  short  reference  to  some  of  the  details  will  serve  to  make  this  plain. 

In  the  upper  Rawah  filing  of  October,  1902,  nothing  was  said  about  the  proposed 
tunnel  diversion,  but  a  claim  was  made  to  the  use  of  certain  lakes  or  natural  reser- 
voirs described  as  having  an  aggregate  capacity  of  325,000,000  cubic  feet.  The 
tunnel  diversion  was  merely  a  mental  conception  until  1904.  In  March  of  that  year 
a  survey  was  made  of  a  tunnel  site,  a  ditch  from  the  west  fork  of  the  Laramie  to  the 
east  fork,  and  a  channel  reservoir  on  the  east  fork  above  the  tunnel  site;  and  in  May 
following  a  statement  of  clain  under  them  was  filed,  in  which  the  estimated  cost  of  the 
tunnel  and  ditch  was  given  as  $189,200  and  that  of  the  reservoir  as  $20,000.  Later  in 
1904  a  survey  was  made  of  a  tunnel  site,  three  collecting  ditches,  and  two  pipe  lines, 
and  in  October  of  that  year  a  statement  of  claim  under  them  was  filed,  in  which 
the  estimated  cost  of  the  tunnel,  ditches,  and  pipe  lines  was  given  as  ?375,000.  The 
location  and  dimensions  of  the  tunnel  in  the  second  survey  differed  from  those  in  the 
first.  The  difference  was  not  pronounced,  and  yet  was  a  real  change.  In  September, 
1906,  another  statement  of  claim  was  filed  covering  the  upper  Rawah  ditch,  the  lakes 
connected  therewith,  and  the  tunnel.  This  statement  declared  that  the  lakes  were 
to  be  so  enlarged  that  they  would  have  an  aggregate  capacity  of  1.2-">0,000.000  cubic 
feet,  instead  of  325,000,000  as  stated  in  the  filing  of  1902;  and  if  again  changed  the  loca- 
tion and  dimensions  of  the  tunnel — this  time  more  than  before. 

In  1905  and  1906  surveys  were  made  to  find  a  route  for  an  open  canal  from  the 
Laramie  around  the  mountains,  through  a  portion  of  Wyoming  and  back  to  Colorado, 
which  would  avoid  the  construction  of  a  tunnel  and  the  maintenance  of  ditches  in 
the  higher  mountain  levels;  and  in  1908  a  statement  of  claim  covering  such  a  canal 

1  An  eiv-il'ieer  who  had  been  cwnccte  1  with  the  work  and  was  a  witness  tar  the  defendants,  said:  ''This 
svUem  hi  it  .vo  distinct,  an  lin  lep.'nient  s  mrc-os  of  supply;  that  from  the  Laramie  River  and  that  from  the 
Poudre  River  Basin  an  i  the  tributaries  of  the  South  Plalte.  and  it  was  sode-igncd  thai  the  Poudre  Valley 
Canal  couH  divert  water  from  the  P.uidre  River  and  also  from  the  northern  tributaries  of  the  Poudre  inter- 
c  'pie  1  by  the  canal  ani  from  the  tributaries  of  the  South  PIu'  ti  as  Crow  Creek  and  intercepted 

by  the  canal  wherever  there  was  surnlus  water.  We  estimated  that  the  amount  of  water  available  out  side 
of  the  Laramie  River  source  would  be  between  so.000  and  100.000  acre-feet  per  annum  as  an  average. " 


DE\7ELOPMEXT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO    RIVER    BASIN.  51 

was  filed,  as  was  also  a  claim  covering  a  large  channel  reservoir  nine  miles  down  the 
stream  from  the  tunnel  site.  The  estimated  cost  of  the  canal  was  given  as  $1,000,000 
and  that  of  the  reservoir  as  $200,000.  The  plan  evidenced  by  these  filings  was  that 
of  impounding  the  water  in  the  reservoir  and  liberating  it  in  an  equalised  flow  into 
the  canal,  which  was  to  carry  it  into  the  Poudre  watershed  without  the  aid  of  a  tunnel. 
Late  in  1908  and  in  the  fore  part  of  1909  another  survey  along  the  same  general  line 
and  with  the  same  purpose  was  made  at  a  cost  of  $15,000.  Early  in  1909  a  statement 
of  claim  was  filed  covering  a  proposed  reservoir  near  the  tunnel  site,  the  cost  being 
estimated  at  $200,000. 

In  1907  the  Laramie-Poudre  Reservoirs  and  Irrigation  Co.  succeeded  to  whatever 
rights  the  promoters  had  acquired  up  to  that  time,  and  all  subsequent  surveys,  in- 
vestigations, and  filings  were  made  by  it.  In  April,  1909,  the  Greeley- Poudre  irriga- 
tion district,  within  which  the  water  is  intended  to  be  used,  was  organized.  At 
that  time  sufficient  capital  had  not  been  obtained  to  carry  the  project  through  in  any 
form.  In  September  following  the  irrigation  company  and  the  irrigation  district  the 
entered  into  a  tentative  contract,  under  which  the  company  was  to  consummate  the 
project  in  its  present  form,  and,  after  doing  the  construction  work,  was  to  transfer  the 
property  to  the  district.  Payment  therefor  was  to  be  made  in  interest-bearing  bonds 
of  the  district.  By  a  vote  taken  the  next  month,  the  district  ratified  the  contract  and 
authorized  the  issue  of  the  bonds.  About  the  last  of  that  month  the  work  of  boring 
the  tunnel  and  making  the  diversion  was  begun. 

It  is  manifest  from  this  historical  outline  that  the  question  of  whether,  and  also 
how,  this  proposed  appropriation  should  be  made  remained  an  open  one  until  the 
contract  with  the  irrigation  district  was  made  and  ratified  in  1909.  Up  to  that  time 
the  whole  subject  was  at  large.  There  was  no  fixed  or  definite  plan.  It  was  all  in  an 
inceptive  and  formative  stage — investigations  being  almost  constantly  in  progress  to 
del  ermine  its  feasibility  and  whether  changes  and  alternatives  should  be  adopted 
rather  than  the  primary  conception.  It  had  not  reached  a  point  where  there  was 
fixed  and  definite  purpose  to  take  it  up-and  carry  it  through.  An  appropriation  does 
not  take  priority  by  relation  as  of  a  time  anterior  to  the  existence  of  such  a  purpose. 

It  no  doubt  is  true  that  the  original  promoters  intended  all  along  to  make  a  large 
appropriation  from  the  Laramie  by  some  means,  provided  the  requisite  capital  could 
be  obtained,  but  this  is  an  altogether  inadequate  basis  for  applying  the  doctrine  of 
relation. 

Xo  separate  appropriation  was  effected  by  what  was  done  on  the  upper  Hawaii  ditch. 
The  purpose  to  use  it  in  connection  with  the  Skyline  was  not  carried  out,  but  aban- 
doned. This,  as  Link  testified,  was  its  "principal"  purpose.  The  purpose  to  make 
it  an  accessory  of  the  large  project  was  secondary  and  contingent.  Therefore  the  work 
on  it  can  not  be  taken  as  affecting  or  tolling  back  the  priority  of  that  project. 

Actual  work  in  making  the  tunnel  diversion  was  begun  as  before  shown,  about  the 
last  of  October,  1909.  Thereafter  it  was  prosecuted  with  much  diligence  and  in  1911, 
when  this  suit  was  brought,  it  had  been  carried  so  nearly  to  a  state  of  completion  that 
the  assumption  reasonably  may  be  indulged  that,  but  for  the  suit,  the  appropriation 
soon  would  have  been  perfected.  We  conclude  that  the  appropriation  should  be 
accorded  a  priorty  by  relation  as  of  the  latter  part  of  October,  1909,  when  the  work 
was  t>egun. 

Applying  a  like  rule  to  the  Wyoming  appropriations,  several  of  them  must  be 
treated  as  relating  to  later  dates,  and  therefore  as  being  junior  to  that  appropriation. 
Some  of  the  projects  in  that  State  are  founded  on  a  plurality  of  appropriations,  a  part 
of  which  are  senior  and  a  part  junior  to  that  one. 

The  evidence  shows  that  the  Wyoming  appropriations  having  priorities  senior  to 
the  one  in  Colorado,  and  which  are  dependent  on  the  available  supply  before  named, 
cover  181,500  acres  of  land  and  that  the  amount  of  water  appropriated  and  reasonably 
required  for  the  irrigation  of  these  lands  is  272,500  acre-feet.  A  much  larger  amount 
is  claimed,  but  our  finding  restricts  the  amount  to  what  the  evidence  shows  is  reasona- 
bly required,  which  is  one  acre-foot  per  a<  re  for  the  larger  part  of  the  lands,  two  acre- 
feet  per  acre  for  a  part  and  two  and  one-half  acre  feet  per  acre  for  the  remainder. 

As  the  available  supply  is  288,000  acre-feet  and  the  amount  covered  by  senior 
appropri-.il  ions  in  \Vyoming  is  272,500  acre-feet,  there  remain  15.500  acre- fed  which 
ore  subject  to  this  junior  appropriation  in  Colorado.  The  amount  sought  to  be  diverted 
and  taken  under  it  is  much  larger. 

A  decree  will  accordingly  lie  entered  enjoining  the  defendants  from  diverting  or 
taking  more  than  15,500  acre-feet  per  year  from  the  Laramie  River  by  means  of  or 
through  the  so-called  Laramie-Poudre  project- 
It  is  so  ordered. 

A  t  rue  copy. 

Test:  — , 

Cleric,  Supreme  Court,  U.  S. 


52  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER   COLORADO    RIVER    BASIX. 

COMMITTEE  ox  IRRICATIOX  OF  AI:II>  LAXDS, 

HOUSE  OK  RKPKKSKXTATTVES. 

Junt    !1.   198*. 


The  committee  met  at  10.30  o'clock  a.  m..  Hon.  Nicholas  J.  SinnoU  presiding. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  This  meeting  was  called  this  morning  for  the  purpose  of  hearing 
Mr.  Hoover,  who  is  chairman  of  the  Colorado  River  Commission  that  examined  into     ( 
the  matter  we  are  considering.     We  will  be  glad  to  hear  you.  Mr.  Secretary. 

STATEMENT     OF    HON.    HERBERT     C.     HOOVER,     SECRETARY     OF 

COMMERCE. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  assume  the  committee  is  quite  familiar  with 
the  physiographic  character  of  the  river,  the  topography,  and  the  problems  that  are 
presented. 

Mr.  SINXOTT.  We  have  had  considerable  testimony  on  those  points. 
Secretary  HOOVER.  It  can  be  expressed  in  very  few  words,  that  the  Colorado  River 
drains  portions  of  seven  States:  that  the  volume  of  flow  of  the  river  varies  seasonally 
during  the  year  from  somewhere  between  five  to  six  thousand  second-feet  up  to 
200,000  second-feet,  while  it.  varies  in  total  quantity  of  discharge  from  fl.OCO.CI  0  acre- 
feet  per  annum  up  to  26.COO.OCO  acre-feet  in  different  years.  The  irrigation  work  now 
in  progress  in  the  lower  river  has  absorbed  the  whole  flow  of  the  river  at  low  water, 
and  therefore  further  extension  of  irrigation  is  estopped,  unle.-s  sioiage  of  the  flocd 
flow  is  undertaken.  From  the  storage  point  of  view  the  river  is  unique.  The  amount 
of  additional  acreage  in  the  United  States  that  can  be  brought  under  irrigation  in  the 
upper  and  lower  river  can  be  extended  by  between  four  and  six  million  acres,  a 
against  perhaps  under  3.COO.OOO  acres  now  under  irrigaticn.  Furthermore,  the  spring 
floods  now  endanger  the  land  under  irrigation,  and  the  problem  is  also  one  of  storage 
for  control  purposes. 

The  Colorado  River  Commission,  of  which  I  am  the  chairman,  and  on  which  I 
represent  the  Federal  Government,  was  established  by  legislation  in  the  seven  States 
and  by  the  Federal  Government  looking  in  the  first  instance  to  an  agreement  that 
would  prevent  legal  conflict  between  the  different  States  in  the  basin  over  the  use  of 
water.  The  legislation  establishing  the  commission  in  some  of  the  States  also  implies 
that  the  commission  should  give  consideration  to  a  definite  plan  for  the  development 
of  the  river  as  a  whole,  both  from  the  legal  and  economic  phases  and  also  from  the 
engineering  point  of  view.  But  whether  that  is  expressed  or  not  it  is  implied,  because 
there  can  be  no  settlement  of  the  legal  rights  of  the  different  States  that  did  not  embrace 
the  contemplation  of  storage  along  the  river.  The  only  hope  of  securing  further  devel- 
opment and  the  application  of  the  waters  to  their  maximum  use  is  through  storage. 
Therefore  it  is  impossible  to  discuss  the  question  of  interstate  water  rights  without 
discussing  it  in  the  phase  of  storage. 

The  commission  is  endeavoring  to  develop  an  adjustment  of  the  interstate  rights 
to  the  water,  and  will  probably  offer  some  recommendations  as  to  a  long-view  program 
for  the  development  of  the  river. 

On  the  legal  side  it  is  proposed  that  an  agreement  should  be  entered  into  between 
the  seven  States  and  the  Federal  Government  establishing  the  rights  of  the  seven 
States  to  their  participation  in  the  water,  and  that  that  agreement,  if  it  meets  the 
approval  of  the  legislatures  of  the  seven  States  and  the  Federal  Government,  will 
become  statutory  law  with  respect  to  the  basin. 

There  are  no  agreements  yet  reached  in  that  phase  of  the  matter.  The  commission 
reassembles  to  consider  it  fdrther  on  the  1st  of  August  at  Santa  Fe.  In  the  meantime 
the  recent  decision  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  has  considerably  advanced 
the  whole  conception  of  interstate  water  rights. 

Mr.  SINXOTT.  You  speak  of  the  Wyoming-Colorado  case'.1 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes:  the  Wyoming-Colorado  case.  That  decision,  perhaps, 
simplifies  the  issues,  because  it  fairly  definitely  establishes  interstate  rights  to  the 
water  by  priority  of  beneficial  use. 

In  the  considerations  by  the  commission  of  this  question,  which  has  lasted  over 
some  months  and  has  involved  public  hearings  at  various  points  in  the  basin,  the 
engineering  problems,  of  course,  have  been  constantly  in  the  minds  of  the  commission 
and  the  public  generally  who  have  appeared  before  the  commission. 

The  most  pressing  of  these  problems  is  the  control  of  the  annual  freshets  on  the 
river,  not  only  from  the  point  of  view  of  storage  but  from  the  point  of  view  of  safety     /> 
to  the  people  of  the  lower  river.     The  Imperial  Valley  and  the  Arizona  districts  are    {• 
in  great  danger  at  the  present  time,  and  it  becomes  vital  that  control  of  the  freshets 
shall  be  established.     Almost  at  any  moment  in  one  of  these  freshets  the  Imperial 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER 'COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  53 

Valley  may  be  drowned  out  by  the  breaking  of  the  river  into  the  Salton  Sea.  So 
imminent  has  the  danger  become  to  the  valley  that  the  people  in  that  area  are  now 
having  difficulty  in  obtaining  mortgages  and  other  loans  to  carry  on  their  business. 

The  banks  throughout  the  southern  part  of  California  have  become  fearful  that  action 
may  not  be  taken  by  the  Government  in  time  to  assure  the  safety  of  the  large  invest- 
ment3  already  mada,  and  the  paople  are  finding  a  groat  deal  of  difficulty  to  finance 
themsalves. 

I  mention  this  as  an  indication  of  the  pressing  emergency  of  the  situation  and  the 
necessity  for  early  action. 

In  the  various  discussions  before  and  in  the  commission,  consideration  has  been 
given  to  the  question  of  at  what  pirticular  point  storage  should  be  first  established, 
so  as  to  fall  into  any  plan  of  a  Ion ,'  view  program  that  might  extend  over  two  centtiri.-s, 
for  whatever  is  done  in  this  situation  should  be  done  in  the  long  view.  We  have  in  this 
river  the  advantage  of  a  practically  virgin  situation  that  can  be  considered  from  the 
point  of  view  of  broad  mtional  development  with  a  definite,  well-considered  program . 

Although  there  may  be  many  views  as  to  secondary  steps  in  development,  they  can 
be  neglected  at  the  pro-nut  time.  However,  without  the  commission  having  gone  on 
to  any  particular  record  in  the  matter,  I  think  all  of  the  members  of  the  commission 
are  in  agreement  that  tha  first  step  is  the  construction  of  a  large  storage  dam  somewhere 
in  the  neighborhood  of  Boulder  Canyon.  There  may  be  some  questions  of  founda- 
tions that  may  shift  the  site  of  that  dam  15  or  20  miles.  I  believe  the  great  majority 
of  engineering  and  public  view  does  not  question  that  this  is  the  first  step. 

The  reasons  for  coming  to  this  conclusion  are,  first,  the  immediate  importance  of 
control  of  flood  flow,  the  large  and  cheap  storage  provided  at  this  site,  and  the  prob- 
ability of  an  early  development  of  a  power  market.  The  location  of  the  dam  at  or  near 
Boulder  Canyon,  as  against  projected  dams  farther  up  the  river,  has  been  disputed  by 
some,  but  inasmuch  as  Boulder  Canyon  is  some  150  miles  nearer  to  a  power  market, 
and  as  the  sale  of  power  will  be  ultimately  necessary  in  order  to  establish  a  substratum 
to  finance  the  operation,  that  reason  alone  would  seem  convincing  as  to  the  location  of 
the  dam  at  that  point . 

Mr.  LITTLE.  How  far  from  the  Boulder  Canyon  is  the  first  extended  area  of  land  that 
would  be  irrigable? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  should  think  probably  130  or  150  miles  below. 

Some  who  have  advocated  a  dam  at  the  next  practical  site,  some  250  miles  farther 
up  the  river,  look  at  it  solely  from  the  engineering  point  of  view  rather  than  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  economics  of  the  problem.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  is  necessary 
to  go  into  that  question  in  any  detail;  if  so.  the  engineers  of  the  Irrigation  Service  can 
no  doubt  inform  the  committee  with  a  great  deal  more  detail  than  I  can . 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  What  do  you  mean  by  the  economics  of  the  problem? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  The  availability  of  the  power  market,  and  the  fact  that  the  dam  at 
the  lower  site  would  control  a  larger  degree  of  possible  freshet  than  dams  farther  up  the 
river,  and  that  that  location  of  a  dam  below  does  not  at  all  interfere  with  the  subsequent 
development  of  other  dams  above.  There  is  a  legal  phase  in  the  problem  in  the  devel- 
opment of  the  river  that  must  be  taken  into  consideration.  That  is  the  fact  that  the 
lands  which  are  likely  first  to  come  into  irrigation,  on  the  present  return  from  irrigated 
lands,  the  ones  most  easily  financed  are  those  in  the  lower  part  of  the  basin.  A  larger 
amount  of  land  in  the  upper  basin  will  no  doubt  be  brought  into  irrigation  at  later 
limes.  Therefore,  the  States  in  the  upper  basin  have  been  anxious  that  there  should 
be  no  water  rights  established  by  storage  or  prior  beneficial  use  in  the  lower  basin  that 
will  interfere  with  their  ultimate  development  above.  In  other  words,  that  as  a  result 
of  the  works  in  the  lower  basin  there  should  be  no  limitations  of  the  possibilities  of 
bringing  their  land  into  fruitful  development. 

Mr.  BANKHEAD.  What  do  you  mean  by  the  lower  and  upper  basins? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  We  generally  speak  of  California  and  Arizona  as  the  lower  basin, 
as  distinguished  from  Colorado.  Nevada,  I" tali.  New  Mexico,  and  Wyoming  in  the 
upper  basin.  These  lands  in  here  [indicating  on  map  lands  in  southern  California 
and  Arizona],  will  come  into  play  first  being  the  easier  of  development.  The  ultimate 
earnings  of  the  land  farther  north  may  be  equal  to  those  below,  but  their  development 
will  be  slower.  That  has  been  the  history  of  most  streams,  so  far  as  I  know,  that  is,  the 
first  lands  to  be  brought  into  irrigation  are  the  lands  in  the  lower  river.  I  raise  this 
matter  because  it  is  a  very  pressing  question  to  the  Stales  in  the  upper  basin. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Is  the  controversy  pending  among  iho  seven  States  as  to  the  division 
of  the  water  and  the  location  of  the  dam? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  do  not  think  there  is  division  of  opinion  that  the  most  urgent 
dam  is  needed  in  the  neighborhood  of  Boulder  Canyon. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Then  the  only  question  is  as  to  the  division  of  storage  water? 


54  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER   COLORADO    RIVER    BASIX. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  The  question  in  llie  minds  of  the  upper  hatsin  is  that  the  con- 
struction of  a  dam  below  them  at  Boulder  Canyon  would  establish  a  water  right  under 
the  practice  of  the  Western  States  that  the  actual  storage  of  water  creates  the  right  to 
use  the  water.  That  is,  they  might  by  such  a  beneficial  application  be  compelled 
to  allow  the  flow  of  the  water  into  the  dam  at  the  sacrifice  of  their  own  lands.  The 
commission  is  endeavoring  to  solve  that  problem. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  They  want  to  save  this  question  of  prior  right? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  They  think  there  might  be  established  a  prior  right  limiting 
the  development,  of  their  lands. 

Mr.  RAKER.  In  other  words,  I  gather  from  your  first  statement  that  this  water  can 
not  be  used  now,  but  it  must  be  in  process  of  storage  either  in  the  upper  part  of  the 
river  or  below. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  The  problem  of  the  retention  of  a  right  to  the  water  by  the  States 
in  the  upper  basin  is  not  insoluble,  because  the  total  flow  and  storage  possibilities  of 
the  river  along  its  entire  course  are  probably  sufficient  to  irrigate  all  of  the  land  that 
can  ever  be  brought  under  irrigation. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Then  is  it  your  view  in  that  connection  that  this  legislation  should  go 
forward,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  commission  has  not  finally  determined, 
or  that  the  States  have  not  acted  upon  whatever  recommendations  the  commission 
has  agreed  Upon? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  think  the  legislation  should  go  forward,  because  the  emer- 
gency of  the  situation  in  the  Imperial  Valley  requires  almost  immediate  action  in 
the  control  of  the  river  and  distinguishes  it  from  any  other  question. 

Mr.  RAKER.  It  would  not  in  any  way  affect  the  adjustment  of  the  matter  before 
the  commission. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  do  not  think  the  States  of  the  lower  basin  would  raise  any 
objection  to  a  provision  in  the. bill  that  the  creation  of  this  storage  in  itself  created  no 
water  rights  as  against  the  upper  States.  I  believe  that  the  feeling  in  the  upper  States 
could  be  relieved  by  a  provision  that  the  erection  of  the  dam  did  not  create  the  water 
rights  as  against  them,  with  full  provision  for  their  protection.  Some  such  action 
should  remove  any  legitimate  objection  to  immediately  proceeding  with  the  con- 
struction. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  being  the  case,  the  Government  proceeding  to  construct  the 
Boulder  Creek  dam,  under  the  law  applicable  to  the  first  appropriation  of  the  water 
in  the  Western  States,  would  that  in  any  way  permit  or  authorize  a  larger  construction 
if,  eventually,  the  water  was  taken  above? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  No;  I  think  we  are  all  pretty  well  agreed  that  there  is  a  suffi- 
ciency of  water  for  the  whole  basin,  even  in  long-view  development. 

Mr.  HERRICK.  The  point  is  to  impound  the  whole  backwater  at  flood  stage,  is  it 
not? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HERRICK.  When  the  gates  to  the  dam  are  closed,  to  what  extent  would  it  protect 
the  flow  of  the  river? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  The  capacity  of  the  projected  dam  would  be  equal,  I  think, 
to  the  flow  of  the  entire  river  for  a  period  of  something  less  than  two  years. 

Mr.  HERRICK.  It  would  hold  practically  the  entire  river? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  For  a  period  of  two  years,  if  you  wanted  to  do  it. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  You  spoke  of  inserting  a  provision  in  this  bill  which  would  safe- 
guard the  rights  of  the  States  upstream  by  abrogating  the  law  of  appropriation  as  it. 
now  exists  in  so  far  as  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  is  concerned,  bo  you  not  find 
difficulty  in  now  determining  what  the  ultimate  irrigation  possibilities  are  within 
the  seven  interested  States? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes;  the  several  States  are  not  in  any  very  close  agreement  as 
to  what  the  actual  acreage  is  that  they  will  be  able  to  ultimately  develop.  Taking 
the  view  of  the  Reclamation  Service,  there  is  apparently,  with  a  careful  development 
of  the  river,  enough  water  for  all. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  It  has  been  suggested  that  an  agreement  should  be  made  among  the 
States  of  the  Colorado  River  Basin  that  for  the  next  20  or  30  years  any  irrigation 
development,  which  takes  place  on  that  stream  shall  not  create  a  prior  right  to  the  use 
of  water.  In  other  words,  that  the  doctrine  of  priority  would  not  apply  as  between 
all  lands  brought  under  irrigation  during  the  period  thus  agreed  upon,  but  that  all 
appropriations  of  water  should  be  considered  as  of  even  date.  At  the  end  of  this 
period  of  years  each  State  would  be  better  able  to  determine  j  ust  how  much  land  ( ould 
be  irrigated  and  they  could  then  agree  upon  an  equitable  division  of  the  water. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  The  commission  has  come  to  no  conclusion  as  yet.  The  theme 
that  seems  to  meet  with  more  general  approval  than  any  other  is  that  each  State  could 
proceed  with  its  development  up  to  the  absorption  of  a  certain  number  of  acre-feet 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX.  55 

per  annum,  leaving  a  considerable  residue  of  the  river  unappropriated ;  that  at  some 
future  period,  25  or  50  years  hence,  they  should  again  assemble  and  discuss  what 
would  be  done  with  the  remainder,  thus  <ji\ing  an  ample  period  to  work  out  the  rela- 
tive participation  of  the  different  States,  based  upon  the  relative  amount  of  land 
which  they  could  bring  into  irrigation. 

.Mr.  HAYDEN.  Is  there  any  conflict,  not  only  as  to  the  area  of  land  that  may  be 
irrigated,  but  as  to  the  allocation  among  the  States  of  power  developed  on  the  Colorado 
River? 

S ( -c ret  an  1 1  o <  >  \ •  K  H  .  I  do  not  think  there  is  any  intrinsic  dispute  about  that  question, 
because  there  is  a  general  realization  that  power  must  be  sold  where  it  can  bring  a 
return.  There  is  also  the  realization  that  the  river  at  its  maximum  development, 
perhaps  will  produce  five  or  six  million  horsepower,  so  the  production  of  five  or  six 
hundred  thousand  horsepower  at  Boulder  Canyon  is  not  the  ultimate  end  or  limit 
of  what  can  be  secured.  I  do  not  believe  you  will  find  there  is  much  anxiety  about 
that  question.  What  there  was  anxiety  about  is  a  matter  which  will  undoubtedly 
be  established  in  the  agreement  of  the  commission,  and  this  is,  that  there  shall  be  a 
priority  of  agriculture  over  the  use  for  power. 

$Ir.  LITTLE.  Is  it  intended  that- Federal  legislation  shall  cover  that? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  My  feeling  about  the  present  Federal  legislation  is  that  it  needs 
to  be  confined  purely  to  the  question  of  the  erection  of  storage  works  at  Boulder 
Canyon. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  I  thought  you  said  a  little  while  ago  that  there  should  be  some  Federal 
enactment  in  connection  with  the  rights  arising  from  the  use  of  the  water. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Pending  the  completion  of  the  work  of  the  commission  the 
only  need  is  legal  reservations  in  respect  to  the  construction  of  this  particular  dam. 
I  believe  that  under  the  law  of  Colorado,  for  instance,  the  erection  of  storage  gives. 
a  right  to  the  use  of  the  water  of  that  storage  as  against  subsequent  claimants  for  water 
from  the  stream  above  the  dam  so  far  as  it  might  deplete  storage.  Necessarily  there 
is  some  alarm  in  the  minds  of  the  States  above  that  the  erection  of  this  particular 
storage  might  give  the  lower  basin  States  the  right  to  call  on  the  upper  States  to  allow 
the  river  to  flow  into  the  dam  without  reference  to  their  own  needs,  and  this  might 
apply  even  were  all  of  the  water  in  storage  not  used  for  many  years. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Has  the  commission  reached  the  conclusion  that  a  Federal  enactment 
would  settle  the  question  as  to  whether  the  lower  States  should  have  priority  on  the 
Boulder  Canyon  water? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  No;  I  do  not  think  the  lower  States  want  a  priority  at  all. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  I  thought,  from  what  you  said  that  the  bill  should  probably  contain  a 
provision  that  no  special  rights  should  arise  to  the  Southern  States,  as  against  the 
others,  by  reason  of  the  building  of  the  dam,  and  the  question  in  my  mind  was  whether 
you  had  reached  a  conclusion  that.  Congress  could  probably  make  such  a  law. 

Secretary  HOOVKR.  My  advice  was  that  Congress  could,  in  the  bill  authorizing  the 
construction  of  this  dam,  make  such  a  provision  as  would  relieve  the  upper  States  of 
danger  upon  this  particular  point. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Have  you  had  the  law  examined  sufficiently  so  that  you  feel  sure  of 
your  position? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  would  want  to  take  further  advice  about  it,  especially  in 
view  of  the  late  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  You  also  spoke  of  agreements  possible  between  the  States.  Has  it  been 
settled  legally  that  the  States  can  make  agreements  about  that  water  that  would  bind 
anybody? 

Secretary  HOOVKR.  Yes;  I  am  advised  that  this  is  a  fully  established  right  under 
the  Constitution.  It  has  been  very  seldom  taken  advantage  of.  In  other  words,  it 
has  been  established  that  a  treaty  can  be  entered  between  the  States,  and  if  the 
treaty  is  ratified  by  the  Congress  it  becomes  statutory  law. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  The  States  of  Oregon  and  Washington  entered  into  an  agreement  in 
reference  to  the  Columbia  River  which  was  ratified  by  Congress. 

Mr.  LITTLE.   Does  that  bind  any'nodv.  in  reference  to  the  respective  rights? 

Secretary  HOOVER.   I  assume  it  is  binding. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Suppose  there  were  no  such  agreement,  what  would  be  the  effect  of  a 
Federal  law  of  that  kind? 

Secretary  HOOVKR.  I  suppose  that  if  the  dam  is  erected  by  the  Federal  Government, 
the  Federal  (Jovernnient  would  be  the  poss.-s-or  of  any  rights  applicable  to  that  dam — - 
you  will  need  legal  instruction  upon  many  of  these  quest  ions. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Is  that  a  navigable  stream,  Mr.  Secretary'.' 

Secretary  HOOVKR.  The  Colorado  has  been  navigated  above  the  mouth  of  the  Cilu 
River;  it  is  not  navigated  at  the  present  time. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Is  it  navigable  at  the  Boulder  Dam? 


56  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER   BASIN. 

Secretary  HOOVER.   Xn. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  How  far  from  there  is  it  navigable  above  and  below? 

retary  HOOVER.   Navigation  was  once  carried  up  to  a  point  some  25  miles  below, 
but  systematically  say  to  100  miles  below  that  canyon. 

Mr.  HAYPEX.  Years  asro  steamboats  went  from  the  mouth  of  the  Colorado  River 
up  to  and  above  Fort  Mohave.     That  was  before  the  transcontinental  railroads  were     / 
constructed.     Since  that  time  there  has  been  but  little  navigation  on  the  river.     ^ 
The  effect  of  the  construction  of  the  Laguna  Dam  was  to  prevent  navigation,  although 
the  river  is  declared  to  be  navigable  by  a  treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Mexico 
and  is  so  considered  by  the  \\'ar  Department. 

Mr.  SIXNOTT.  Is  there  any  public  land  at  that  dam  site? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes.  sir;  it  would  all  be  built  on  public  land,  and  from  the 

S-actical  point  of  view  I  assume  that  every  dam  that  could  be  built  on  the  Colorado 
iver  at  any  point  would  involve  the  use  of  public  land,  so  that  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment has  a  very  considerable  voice  in  the  entire  matter. 

Mr.  SMITH.  What  is  the  length  of  time  that  would  be  required  to  construct  the 
Boulder  Dam? 

Secretary-  HOOVER.  From  8  to  10  years. 

Mr.  SMITH.  In  view  of  the  emergency  in  the  Imperial  Valley  is  there  any  other 
relief  that  could  be  more  speedily  applied  than  the  holding  back  of  the  water? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  It  is  possible  to  get  relief  to  the  people  in  the  Imperial  Valley 
at  some  intermediate  stage  of  the  construction  of  the  dam  at  Boulder  Canyon.  I 
think  it  ought  to  be  possible  to  get  relief  in  there  in  three  or  perhaps  four  years. 

Mr.  SMITH.  Has  any  other  plan  been  contemplated  that  would  obviate  the  possi- 
bility of  danger  to  the  property  interests  there? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  There  are  a  number  of  engineering  suggestions  that  have  been 
made.  I  doubt  whether  most  of  them  will  hold  water,  however,  when  put  to  the  test . 
One  of  those  suggestions  is  to  blast  in  the  canyon  and  make  a  dump  in  the  river  that 
would  create  a  sufficient  holdback  to  give  some  relief.  But  I  doubt  whether  any 
serious  engineer  would  contemplate  placing  the  lives  of  ultimately  from  three  to  four 
hundred  thousand  people  under  the  dangers  of  such  construction. 

Mr.  SMITH.  A  couple  of  years  a?o  we  had  under  consideration  a  proposition  to  build 
an  all-American  canal.  Could  that  work  go  on  more  speedily  than  the  plan  of  im- 
pounding the  water? 

Secretarv  HOOVER.  That  work  could  go  on  coincidentally  with  the  work  on  the  da  m 
if  it  were  desired. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Does  your  commission  favor  that  all-American  canal? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  We  have  never  discussed  that  subject  because  it  was  one 
purely  local  to  California. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Have  you  an  opinion  on  it  personally? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  think  it  ought  ultimately  to  be  done.  There  are  many 
reasons  why  the  United  States  should  be  independent  of  Mexico  in  the  distribution 
of  the  Colorado  River.  At  the  present  moment  the  Imperial  Valley  is  dependent  on 
the  flow  through  Mexico,  and  it  means  constant  concessions  must  be  given  to  Mexico 
in  respect  to  these  waters. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  Is  the  Colorado  River  Commission  giving  any  consideration  to  water 
rights  in  Mexico  in  making  the  proposed  apportionment? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  have  assumed  that  whatever  rights  Mexico  may  have  in  the 
matter  will  be  amply  satisfied  by  the  residue  of  the  flow  after  everybody  else  is  finished. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  That  view  is  entirely  satisfactory  to  me  because  I  do  not  believe 
that  Mexico  has  a  legal  right  to  any  part  of  the  flow  of  the  Colorado  River.  With 
respect  to  the  matter  of  power,  I  understand  that  there  are  a  number  of  applications 
pending  before  the  Federal  Power  Commission,  one  in  particular  at  Diamond  Creek, 
above  Boulder  Canyon.  The  applicant.  Mr.  James  B.  Girand,  of  Phoenix,  initiated 
a  claim  to  this  power  site  some  years  prior  to  the  passage  of  the  Federal  water  power 
act  and  is  very  insistent  that  this  right  be  accorded  to  him.  Mr.  Girand  claims  that 
he  has  fully  complied  with  the  terms  of  the  Federal  water  power  act  and  is  ready  to 
proceed  with  construction.  I  understand,  however,  that  some  representation  was 
made  by  the  Colorado  River  Commission  to  the  Federal  Power  Commission  by  which 
the  approval  of  his  application  has  been  withheld.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the 
facts  in  the  matter? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  The  Colorado  River  Commission  made  only  the  suggestion  to 
the  Federal  Water  Power  Commission  that  none  of  the  rights  on  the  river  should  be 
given  away  that  did  not  fall  into  mesh  with  a  properly  considered  national  plan  for    f 
this  development  and  did  not  protect  the  irrigation  rights.     We  might  conceivably    t 
have  power  rights  given  all  along  the  river  that  would  jeopardize  its  agricultural 
development.     We  muct  give  agriculture  priority.     So  far  as  that  {articular  power 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX.  57 

>ite  is  concerned,  on  investigation  I  do  not  believe  it  would  be  found  that  it  would 
affect  the  agricultural  question  more  than  a  reservation  that  is  established  no  right 
of  continuous  flow.  IT  has  no  storage  importance.  The  governors  of  some  of  the 
States  and  the  Department  of  the  Interior  did  protest  against  this  permit  temporarily. 
The  Colorado  River  Commission  has  no  authority  in  the  matter  and,  so  far  as  I  know. 
made  no  sugire-M  ions  l.eyond  the  above.  The  Federal  Government  has  a  serious  prob- 
lem to  consider  as  to  the  finance  of  construction  of  the  dam  at  Boulder  Canyon.  It 
would  involve  a  large  sum  of  money,  and  the  recovery  of  that  sum  of  money  will  be 
dependent  considerably  upon  the  development  of  power.  It  has  been  contended 
that  to  admit  a  competitor  in  the  sale  of  that  power  at  once  diminishes  the  return  to 
the  Federal  Government  upon  the  great  burden  that  it  must  assume  in  providing 
storage.  The  Diamond  Creek  Dam  would  be  cheaply  constructed  and  provides  no 
storage  of  consequence.  We  must  consider  that  the  raver  belongs  to  the  people,  and 
that  they  have  a  right  to  develop  their  river  in  such  fashion  as  to  give  them  a  maxi- 
mum return  in  power,  storage,  and  control  of  floods.  I  have  the  feeling  that  the 
Boulder  Canyon  Dam  will  require  a  number  of  years  for  completion.  It  will  require 
10  years  before  it  can  be  brought  in  as  a  large  power  unit,  and  during  that  period 
there  will  be  a  large  development  of  a  market  for  power,  and  it  is  possible,  on  a  careful 
study  of  that  situation,  that  the  Diamond  Creek  power  development  would  not  inter- 
fere with  the  ultimate  market  of  the  Boulder  Canyon.  But  both  the  Department  of 
the  Interior  and  some  of  the  individual  members  of  the  Colorado  River  Commission 
considered  it  was  wise  to  hold  that  application  up  until  the  subject  was  fully  inquired 
into. 

Mr.  SWING.  May  1  add.  in  fairness  to  the  commission,  that  I  personally  know  that 
a  great  number  of  protests  were  tiled  with  the  Federal  Power  Commission,  many  of 
them  from  California,  and  I  know  some  in  Colorado. 

retary  HOOVEK.  There  was  some  feeling  that  Congress  might  be  less  inclined  to 
a'ct'in  saving  this  emergency  situation  in  the  Imperial  Valley  if  the  power  develop- 
ment was  not  held  up  until  Congress  had  all  the  factors  before  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  understand  then  that  at  the  present  time  there  are  no  prior  rights 
granted,  although  there  are  some  applications  on  file,  that  would  in  any  way  affect 
the  Government  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  to  its  highest  capacity. 

retary  HOOVER.  Xo:  I  do  not  think  there  are  any  power  rights  that  amount  to 
anything.  There  are  some  rights  in  the  upper  river  but  they  are  of  no  importance 
in  consideration  of  the  Boulder  dam. 

Mr.  RAKER.  It  seems  to  be  the  policy  to  grant  no  rights  until  the  right  of  the 
Government  is  fully  established  as  to  the  capacity  of  the  dam  at  Boulder  Canyon 
and  the  amount  of  water  that  would  come  there  to  create  a  supply  for  power  purposes 
as  well  as  irrigation. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  have  felt  that  Congress  ought  to  have  the  right  to  consider 
this  situation  before  any  portion  of  it  was  disposed  of. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Then  as  I  understand  it,  as  far  as  determination  by  the  Reclamation 
Service  and  the  Colorado  Jliver  Commission  has  gone,  it  is  that  there  is  sufficient 
water,  flood  and  otherwise,  to  justify  btiilding  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Certainly. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Then,  in  the  second  place,  the  Government  acting  as  an  individual 
would  act  in  constructing  the  dam.  would  make  its  filing,  just  as  anybody  outside  of  the 
Government  would  do.  for  this  water  right,  and  then  when  the  dam  was  constructed 
and  ready  for  use  its  right  would  date  back  to  the  time  of  its  tiling  so  it  would  know 
what  it  originally  started  in  for  and  believed  it  had.  a  sufficient  water  right,  it  could 
maintain  at  the  completion  of  the  dam  in  order  that  there  would  be  no  interfering 
with  any  subsequent  rights  acquired  by  virtue  of  prior  construction  necessary  after 
filing  notice  by  the  Government. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  We  have  put  it  in  a  different  way.  I  do  not  believe  the  Gov- 
ernment requires  any  water  right.  It  does  not  need  to  go  through  any  process  of 
establishing  a  water  risrht.  The  actual  situation  will  solve  that  for  itself.  The  flow 
of  water  will.  I  believe,  keep  the  dam  full  even  with  full  development  above.  But 
I  believe  that  it  is  well  to  relieve  the  anxiety  of  the  upper  States  by  declaring  that  the 
Government  would  exercise  no  claims  in  respect  to  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  In  that  connection  would  we  not  be  met  with  the  contention  that  if 
other  dams  were  constructed,  even  alter  the  Government  had  started,  thai  they  had 
complied  with  the  law  and  that  they  might  have  a  prior  right  over  the  Government, 
and  therefore  it.  would  lie  better  for  the  <  iovernment  to  lay  its  foundation  permanently 
so  there  could  be  no  question  of  the  loss  of  its  rights  u!'t'"-  it  had  .-\  jn-tiiled  an  oMnniimin 
amount  for  the  construction  of  the  dam? 

Secretary  iloovKR.  We  thought  that  c-nild  he  better  safeguarded  \ty  providing  that 
any  water  rights  given  on  the  river  for  power  purposes  should  not  constitute  any  claim 


58  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    J'.ASIN. 

against  agricultural  users.  In  the  discussion  of  the  Diamond  Creek  water  right  I 
think  it  was  agreed  by  all  sides  that  if  and  when  granted  it  should  contain  a  provi- 
that  the  dam  could  not  establish  any  water  ri'_rht.  not  even  a  right  to  th->  continued 
ilnw  of  the  river.  In  other  words,  that  the  person  who  erected  the  dam  took  all  the 
ri-ks.  I  do  not  think  those  applicants  could  have  any  objection  to  it  because  they 
know  the  water  will  flow  with  sufficient  certainty  for  a  century  or  so. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Could  any  private  individual  acquire  any  better  rights  if  the  Govern- «J| 
ment  declared  it  would  take  them  as  a  result  of  this  dam? 

.etary  HOOVER.  I  would  want  to  make  further  inquiry  as  to  the  effect  of  the 
recent  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  upon  the  question.  That  is  whether  an  indi- 
vidual below  the  dam  by  applying  the  water  to  beneficial  use  which  arose  through 
storage  in  the  dam.  would  thereby  create  a  right  as  against  later  application  of  the  ! 
of  water  above  the  dam.  That  question  would  have  to  be  inquired  into  in  the  Ik  lit 
of  the  new  decision.  Ar  the  time  this  bill  was  discussed  it  was  the  view  of  the  solici- 
tors for  the  department  that  the  Congress  could,  by  a  provision  in  this  act,  remedy  the 
fears  of  the  upper  States. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  They  could  fix  private  individuals'  rights? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes.     This  discussion,  however,  was  before  the  recent  decision. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  As  I  understand  you  now.  the  purpose  of  the  commission  is  that  this  bill 
shall  contain  provisions  by  which  the  Government  is  not  obliged  to  accept  any  water 
rights  at  all? 

retary  HOOVER.  Xo;  that  it  contain  a  provision  that  will,  to  the  satisfactior 
the  upper  States,  protect  them  as' against  any  prior  water  rights  created  by  the  con- 
struction of  the  dam  its<-lf. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  By  the  Government? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  But  not  against  the  individual:  as  to  that  you  have  not  reached  a  final 
decision? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Xo. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  That  no  prior  right  is  to  be  created  by  the  construction  of  this  dam? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes:  if  it  can  be  made  to  apply  to  that. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  May  I  ask  whether  it  is  the  idea  that  the  same  character  of  legislation 
shall  appear  in  the  bill  with  regard  to  power  rights,  too? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Xo. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Certain  power  will  be  developed.  Is  there  any  provision  put  into  this- 
bill  as  to  that? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Xo;  I  do  not  think  there  is  any  feeling  that  there  needs  to  be 
any  provision  as  to  the  distribution  of  power. 

Mr.  SMITH.  The  Government  has  no  power  to  provide  that  individuals  would  have 
no  right  under  the  law  to  make  any  claim  on  it.  Every  man  would  have  the  right  to- 
create  this  power. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  With  reference  to  the  provisions  of  the  first  section  of  the  Swing  bil!r 
Mr.  W.  S.  Xorviel.  a  member  of  the  Colorado  River  commission,  who  is  also  the  Ariz- 
ona State  water  commissioner,  has  written  me  a  letter  in  which  he  says: 

"In  the.first  section,  beginning  with  line  8  to  the  end  of  the  section,  the  languap 
objected  to  for  the  reason  that  it  takes  out  of  the  control  of  the  State  of  Arizona  01. 
her  largest  undeveloped  resources,  and  one  to  which  we  have  long  looked  to  be  of  very 
great  benefit  to  our  State  when  developed.    It  would  appear  from  the  language  that  all 
persons,  municipal  corporations,  private  corporations  or  States  would  be  prevented 
from  constructing  or  owning  any  dams  or  diversion  works  in  the  Colorado  River  below 
the  mouth  of  the  Green  River.    I  personally  object  to  this  presumed  reservation  on  the 
part  of  the  United  States  of  the  exclusive  right  to  construct,  etc..  because,  as  I  deem  it. 
the  United  States  has  no  authority  to  make  any  such  reservation,  nor  can  such  author- 
ity be  granted  by  Conirr- 

I  am  sure  that  the  committee  would  be  pleased  to  have  the  benefit  of  your  views. 
as  to  the  necessity  for  such  legislation  as  is  proposed  in  section  1  of  this  bill. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  It  seems  to  me  it  was  an  unnecessary  provision  from  many 
points  of  view.  It  does  raise  a  serious  question  in  the  minds  of  the  States,  but  as  a 
matter  of  fact  there  can  be  no  building  of  dams  without  permission  of  the  Govern- 
ment. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  Anyone  now  has  authority  under  the  water  power  act  to  make 
application  for  a  power  site  on  public  land  and  may  obtain  a  permit  to  develop  it. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  If  section  1  was  enacted  as  it  stands,  it  would  practically  amount    ^^. 
•to  a  repeal  of  the  water  power  act  so  far  as  the  Colorado  River  below  it«  junction  f . 
with  Green  River  is  concerned. 


DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    BAS1X.  59 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  An  applicant  has  the  right  to  apply  under  the  water  power  act,  but 
he  has  no  vested  right. 

Mr.  HAYDEN".  I  suppose  that  the  Federal  Water  Power  Commission  naturally  con- 
sults the  other  Government  departments  before  acting,  but  this  section  proposes  to 
absolutely  prevent  the  Water  Power  Commission  from  granting  a  permit,  because 
all  rights  on  the  lower  river  are  to  be  reserved  to  the  United  States. 

Se  -ret.iry  HOOVER.  I  have  never  S'vn  any  particular  value  in  that  provision.     It 
iMH'-s  a  very  contentious  question.     The  States  are  maintaining  thein rights  to  a  voice 
in  the  assignment  of  power  privileges  so  that  even  when  a  power  right  is  granted  by  the 
I-',-  i.'i'al  I'o.'.vr  <  o'umission  rhe  possessors  of  that  right  must  go  back  to  the  States  and 
lieir  permits.     I  doubt  whether  any  State  will  want  to  sacrifice  its  own  rights  in 
matters,  and  I  have  never  seen  any  real  reason  for  introducing  it  here.     The 
primary  question  here  should  be  simply  the  construction  of  storage  works  that  will 
give  relief  to  the  emergency  situation  in  the  Imperial  Valley  and  increase  the  possi- 
bilities of  irriga  ion. 

Mr.  SivNorr.  How  long  will  it  take  to  construct  the  necessary  works  to  remove  that 
e:n  Tgent  situafio:i? 

•retary  HOOVKR.  I  think  it  is  the  feeling  of  the  reclamation  engineers  that  at 
Borne  perio  1.  say  ihree  or  four  years  after  the  commencement  of  the  construction,  they 
will  be  in  a  position  to  remove  the  major  danger. 

Mr.  SWIN ••; .  llH'  "Tin ,r  to  the  questions  previously  asked,  assuming,  as  I  do,  that 
you  think  the  V>esi  possible  development  of  the  Colorado  River  calls  for  a  unified 
project  for  development  upon  a  harmonious,  comprehensive  plan,  is  there  any  other 
agency,  other  than  the  Government,  that. can  work  that  out  as  a  unified  project? 

Secretary  HOOVKR.  Xu:  the  Government  must  preserve  the  unity  in  the  develop- 
ment. It  has  the  powers  through  control  of  the  public  lands  and  the  Federal  Power 
Commission  and  various  other  agencies. 

Mr-.  RAKER.  That  being  the  fact,  if  the  Government  spends  $40,000,000  to  construct 
the  Boulder  dam  the  testimony  is  that  that  would  supply  the  entire  territory.  Would 
it  be  advisable  for  the  Government  to  yield  this  right  and  permit  others  to  construct 
dams  for  hydroelectric  power  purposes  and  then  have  the  two  competing  for  cus- 
tomers? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  If  it  was  a  question  of  preventing  the  return  of  the  Govern- 
ment investment,  I  would  say  no.  But  it  is  my  impression  that  the  demand  for 
power  in  that  territory  will  ultimately  far  exceed  that  which  will  be  supplied  by 
this  particular  development.  I  do  not  know  that  it  is  any  objective  of  the  Federal 
(iovernment  to  go  into  power  development  per  se.  The  Government  is  concerned 
to  secure  a  control  works  with  irrigation  storage  erected  at  the  least  outlay.  The 
Diamond  Creek  development  is  entirely  a  power  development  and  would "  have  no 
influence  on  agriculture  or  flood  control. 

Mr.  RAKER.  My  point  was — and  I  got  my  impression  from  your  answers — that  the 
two  could  be  constructed  and  still  there  would  be  a  demand  for  the  power  generated 
by  both  of  them. 

Secretary  HOOVKR.  Yes:  and  I  think  for  even  greater  amounts,  eventually.  The 
whole  problem  is  one  of  time.  At  this  moment  there  is  probably  an  immediate  need 
of,  say,  200,000  horsepower;  10  years  hence  there  is  a  possibility  of  a  need  of  a  million 
horsepower. 

Mr.  Hrnsi'ETH.  You  spoke  of  the  construction  of  the  all -American  canal  for  the 
immediate  relief  of  the  people  in  the  Imperial  Valley.  How  long  would  it  take  to 
const  met  that  canal? 

Secretary  HOOVKR.  The  ail-American  canal  will  not  control  the  flood  waters.  I 
have  not  looked  into  it  in  any  detail,  and  I  could  not  give  you  any  reliable  statement 
as  to  the  time  required. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Do  I  correctly  understand  your  statement,  Mr.  Secretary,  in  regard  to 
the  water  supply,  that  even  if  the  Flaming  Gorge  dam,  the  Dewey  Gorge  dam,  and 
the  Glen  Canyon  dam  were  put  in  by  private  individuals  or  otherwise,  and  the  Boulder 
Canyon  was  <tarted  and  finally  completed,  there  would  be  no  diminution  of  water  to 
interfere  with  the  full  complement  for  the  supply  of  that  dam? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Xo:  it  is  our  conviction  that  there  is  enough  water  to  lill  ulti- 
mately every  one  of  those  dam-. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So  we  will  not  have  to  worry  about  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  being  fully 
supplied,  irrespective  of  the  contemplated  dams  that  have  been  discussed? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Xo:  I  do  not  think  so. 

Mr.  SMITH.  The  whole  scheme  contemplates  that  the  (iovernment  shall  be  reiin- 
Nbursed  for  the  entire  expenditure? 
i      Secretary  HOOVER.  Ultimately. 

Mr.  SMITH.  What  proportion  of  the  expense  will  probably  be  charged  to  agriculture? 


60  DEVELOPMENT   OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVKR    1JASIX. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  That  is  a  very  difiicult  question  to  answer,  because  it  would 
depend  on  the  power  market  which  is  not  yet  created.  It  is  to  sorne  extent  a  bet  on 
the  future  development  of  the  territory — and  a  safe  bet. 

Mr.  SMITH.  In  apportioning  the  cost  per  acre  to  the  land  it  would  necessarily  be 
limited  to  an- amount  that  would  make  the  investment  attractive  to  the  settler,  so  it 
seems  to  me  it  is  important  to  determine  in  advance  whether  the  land  could  be  profit- 
ably reclaimed. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  There  is,  perhaps,  some  hazard  as  to  some  portion  of  this  capital 
outlay,  but  I  would  not  be  able  to  say  how  much.  We  may  look  at  it  from  a  broader 
point  of  view  than  the  return  of  the  whole  capital  outlay.  I  believe  the  Government 
would  be  entirely  justified  in  spending  a  large  sum  on  flood  control  alone,  in  preserva- 
tion of  a  large  community  and  wealth,  without  considering  that  the  whole  cost  be 
levied  upon  the  land. 

Mr.  BAXKHEAD.  How  much  is  it  estimated  that  this  dam  at  Boulder  Canyon  will 
cost? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  The  estimates  vary  from  forty  to  fifty  million  dollars.  Perhaps 
in  the  neighborhood  of  $40,000.000. 

Mr.  BANKHEAD.  Has  any  estimate  been  made  on  the  other  improvements  that  are 
contemplated  above  to  carry  out  the  whole  project? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  My  offhand  impression  is  that  200  years  hence,  when  we  have 
developed  all  the  land  that  can  be  developed  by  the  river,  we  will  have  spent  $400,- 
000.000. 

Mr.  BAXKHEAD.  No  immediate  development  other  than  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam 
is  in  contemplation? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  There  are  some  reclamation  projects  on  the  upper  river  that 
would  involve  dams  at  Dewey  and  Flaming  Gorge,  but  they  are  much  less  expensive. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  What  other  dam  or  dams  are  in  prospect  before  the  proposition  is  finally 
completed? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  There  probably  will  be  dams  at  Boulder  Canyon.  Diamond 
Creek.  Glen  Canyon,  Flaming  Gorge,  Dewey.  and  there  are  several  other  subsidiary 
dams.  So  far  as  storage  is  concerned  both  of  the  great  dams  at  Glen  Canyon  and  at 
Boulder  Canyon  would  not  be  required  for  a  century.  They  might  both  be  required 
for  power  purposes. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  You  have  been  speaking  about  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  What  do  you  think  of  the  feasibility  of  a  dam  there? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  These  canyons  on  the  Colorado  are  the  moat  ideal  spots  in  the 
world  for  dams  of  large  storage  and  power  possibilities. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Irrespective  of  the  fact  that  this  dam  might  be  filled  up  with  silt,  the 
expenditure  would  justify  its  being  built  now,  would  it  not? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes.  The  silt  question  is  purely  academic.  It  has  been 
brought  forward  in  criticism.  Director  Davis  estimates  that  it  will  require  over  200 
years  to  fill  the  dam.  It  would  still  be  good  for  power  purposes  even  then. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  May  I  inquire  what  is  the  history  as  to  filling  up  with  silt?  Are  they 
filled  up  with  silt? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  have  not  looked  into  it. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  I  am  rather  surprised  with  the  statement*  of  the  experts  on  this  silt 
business.  I  have  not  heard  anything  of  that  kind  happening,  and  I  have  lived 
alongside  one  of  these  dams  for  a  long  time.  This  is  the  first  time  I  have  heard  of 
that. 

Mr.  HERRICK.  This  will  be  the  first  dam  built  on  the  river,  and  the  erection  of 
another  is  hardly  contemplated;  so  is  it  not  true  that  this  dam  will  be  completed 
before  the  other  project  would  be  started? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes;  it  would  be  long  before  that. 

Mr.  HERRICK.  In  that  event,  it  would  not  need  the  entire  flow  of  the  river  to  obtain 
a  level;  the  surplus  from  the  other  watershed  would  probably  be  sufficient  to  maintain 
the  level. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  One  has  to  bear  in  mind  that  the  average  amount  of  water 
that  can  be  put  to  maximum  use  below  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  will  probably  be 
much  less  than  the  average  flow  of  the  river  over  a  number  of  years,  no  matter  how 
many  dams  there  are  built  above. 

Mr.  HERRICK.  That  is  what  was  in  my  mind. 

Mr.  SixxoTT.  Are  there  any  other  features  of  the  bill  that  you  desire  to  present  to 
the  committee? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  No. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  Would  the  building  of  a  number  of  dams  lessen  the  flow  of  the  silt? 


r 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN.  61 

Secretary  HOOVEK.  Yes;  these  are  dams  that  will  create  a  large  body  of  still  water. 
Glen  and  Boulder  Canyons  would  each  create  a  lake,  and  that  will  undoubtedly 
result  in  a  deposit  of  silt.  This  is  a  river  that  carries  a  good  deal  of  mud.  That  mud 
is  now  deposited  in  the  lower  regions  of  the  river.  At  the  present  time  it  is  raising  the 
bed  of  the  lower  end  of  the  river  at  the  rate  of  somewhat  under  a  foot  per  annum.  So 
that  the  dikes  which  now  protect  the  Imperial  Valley  must  be  lifted  every  year.  If 
it  is  possible  to  put  the  silt  farther  up  the  river  it  is  going  to  relieve  the  problem  down 
below  very  materially.  That  is  one  of  the  advantages  in  having  the  dams  built. 

Mr.  HERRICK.  Would  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  back  the  water  up  the  river  to  the 
Grand  Canyon? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Xo;  it  is  a  long  way  from  that.  There  is  no  destruction  that  will 
be  caused  by  any  of  the  contemplated  work. 

Mr.  SMITH.  Do  you  think  the  Director  of  the  National  Park  Service  would  admit 
that  ? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  think  he  would  be  good  enough  to  admit  that  it  would  im- 
prove the  scenery  in  some  of  that  section. 

Mr.  BANKHEAD.  You  said  that  it  was  the  intention  that  the  Government  should  be 
ultimately  reimbursed.  That  would  have  to  come  either  from  the  power  generated 
or  from  the  distribution  of  water  rights  for  agricultural  purposes? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes. 

Mr.  BAXKHEAD.  Is  it  contemplated  that  any  interest  will  be  charged  or  simply  the 
original  investment? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Under  the  reclamation  act  there  is  a  practical  abandonment 
of  interest  during  a  certain  stage,  as  you  know.  I  imagine  this  development  should 
have  the  same  consideration.  At  least  that  contribution  (if  it  became  necessary) 
could  be  made  to  secure  flood  control. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Mr.  Davis  told  us  last  week  that  none  of  the  expense  for  the  construction 
of  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  and  its  accessories  would  be  expected  to  be  charged 
against  the  irrigationist,  and  that  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  would  be  paid  for  by  the 
sale  of  power  alone,  and  that  it  ought  not  to  be  charged  against  the  irrigationist.  What 
is  your  view  on  that?  He  thought  it  would  justify  construction  for  power  purposes. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  think  you  are  justified  in  the  conclusion  that  if  the  Federal 
Government  now  advances  money  in  some  form  by  which  this  project  can  be  carried 
forward,  it  will  ultimately  recover  the  money  it  puts  into  it.  But  to  go  fuither  than 
to  express  sueh  an  opinion  is  very  difficult,  because  qne  gets  into  calculations  of  the 
power  market  and  power  rates,  and  the  period  at  which  the  power  could  be  de- 
livered, etc. 

Mr.  RAKER.  But  it  is  your  view  that,  irrespective  of  the  returns  that  may  come 
from  water  or  from  power  or  from  irrigation  there  is  a  sufficient  demand  to  fully  justify 
the  Government  in  constructing  it,  with  the  assurance  that  it  will  be  reimbursed", 
with  a  reasonable  rate  of  interest. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  rather  feel  that  the  Government  ought  to  make  up  its  mind 
on  one  thing,  and  while  I  believe  it  could  be  reimbursed  with  interest,  yet  there  is 
here  a  Federal  function  of  establishing  flood  control  in  the  protection  of  citizens, 
in  which  the  Federal  Government  has,  as  an  established  policy,  always  contributed 
something  from  the  people  at  large,  and  that  we  ought  to  be  prepared  to  believe  that 
some  sacrifice  may  be  made  by  the  Ferderal  Government  in  that  respect.  I  do  not 
think  you  need  to  contemplate  it  now,  but  I  would  not  want  to  say  that  some  item 
of  this  sort  does  not  deserve  consideration.  If  the  power  market  comes  up  to  expecta- 
tions the  Government  might  over  a  long  term  of  yeais  make  a  profit  from  the  whole 
transaction  on  power  alone. 

Mr.  HEKUICK.  When  the  Government  builds  a  battleship  that  costs  $40,000,000,  at 
the  end  of  12  or  15  years  that  battleship  is  obsolete  and  its  value  to  the  Government 
has  gone  down  to  almost  nothing,  whereas  if  you  build  this  dam  with  the  expenditure 
of  this  money  at  the  end  of  fifteen  yeais  its  value  is  intact. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  And  not  only  that,  this  dam  will  be  for  all  time  a  source  of 
direct  income,  and  beyond  that  it  will  have  created  new  homes  for  many  citizens  and 
will  have  protected  many  thousands  of  them  that  are  now  in  danger. 

Mr.  RAKER.  M.r.  Secretary,  the  bill  before  the  committee  has  in  it  some  very  im- 
portant provisions  in  regard  to  the  cost,  and  other  features  which  are  important,  and 
I  would  like  to  have  your  views,  and  I  think  the  committee  would,  too,  on  some  of 
those  features  of  the  bill,  if  you  care  to  give  them. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  I  have  not  gone  into  the  details  of  the  bill  far  enough,  and  I 
did  not  want  to  do  that  until  I  had  a  chance  to  discuss  it  with  the  coiuiiiisi--i<.n  and 
ascertain  whether  they  have  any  views:  in  other  words.  I  would  rather  that  the  States 
express  their  own  views  on  that,  and  they  no  doubt  will. 


62  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    BASIN. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Will  you  come  back  later  and  give  us  the  benefit  of  your  views,  that 
is.  after  you  have  fully  matured  them? 

•retary  HOOVER.  If  you  like,  but  T  prefer  that  you  get  those  views  from  each 
individual  State:  in  other  words.  I  hesitate  to  express  any  views  because  I  am  sitting 
as  chairman  of  their  commission.  You  can  get  an  expression  from  them  because  they 
will  no  doubt  be  before  you  soon. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  In  your  consideration  of  this  proposition  has  there  been 
brought  to  your  attention  from  any  authoritati  •  :t  definite  and  roncret.- 

proposition  to  buy  this  power;  that  is.  from  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  or  from  any  other 
local  power  market? 

Secretary  HOOVER.  Yes:  there  are  three  or  four  groups  interested  in  this  power 
question.  It  is  one  of  the  most  contentious  parts  of  the  whole  business,  hut  it  did  not 
seem  to  me  that  it  is  vitallv  necessary  to  make  up  our  minds  now  as  to  what  we  should 
do  three,  five,  or  ten  years  hence.  The  power  will  be  wanted  even  more  then  than  now. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  When  this  matter  is  presented  to  Congress  it  is  very  important 
that  we  have  some  definite  assurances  as  to  how  the  Government  is  be  reimbursed. 
because  that  is  the  problem  that  confronts  us  in  connection  with  every  irrigation 
project  we  suirg  -st.  namely,  when  will  the  Government  get  its  money  back? 

Mr.  RAKER.  In  addition  to  that,  the  public  will  want  some  definite  assurance 
through  legislation  that  no  one  particular  individual,  if  authority  is  given  to  dispose 
of  it.  will  get  hold  of  this  power  for  40  or  50  years  and  monopolize  it.  That  phase  of  it 
must  be  carefully  considered. 

Secretary  HOOVER.  But  you  have  a  double  protection  there  because  all  the  power 
in  the  United  States  is  now  distributed  subject  to  public  utility  control  as  to  rates  and 
everything  else. 

Mr.  SIXNOTT.  If  there  are  no  more  questions  to  be  asked  of  Mr.  Hoover,  we  thank  him 
very  much.  Mr.  Secretary,  your  statement  has  been  very  illuminating. 


PROTECTION  AND  DEVELOPMENT   OF 
LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN 


HEARINGS 


BEFORE  THE 

COMMITTEE  ON 
IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS 

HOUSE  OF  KEPKESENTATIVES 

SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGRESS 
SECOND  SESSION 

ON 

H.  R.  11449 

By  Mr.  SWING 

A  BILL  TO  PROVIDE  FOR  THE  PROTECTION  AND  DEVELOPMENT 
OF  THE  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN 

PART  2 


JUNE  21,  1922 


WASHINGTON 

GOVKIINMKNT   1'HINTING   OFFICB 
IMG  1922 


COMMITTEE  ON  IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS. 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES. 
SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGRESS,  SECOND  SESSION. 

MOSES  P.  KINKAID,  Nebraska,  Chairman. 

NICHOLAS  J.  SINNOTT,  Oregon.  CARL  HAYDEN,  Arizona. 

EDWARD  C.  LITTLE,  Kansas.  C.  B.  HUDSPETH,  Texas. 

ADDISON  T.  SMITH,  Idaho.  JOHN  E.  RAKER,  California. 

JOHN  W.  SUMMERS,  Washington.  HOMER  L.  LYON,  North  Carolina. 

HENRY  E.  BARBOUR,  California.  WILLIAM  B.  BANKUEAD,  Alabama. 

E.  O.  LEATHERWOOD,  Utah. 
WILLIAM  WILLIAMSON,  South  Dakota. 
SAMUEL  S.  ARENTZ,  Nevada. 
MANUEL  HERRICK,  Oklahoma. 

A.  R.  HUMPHREY,  Clerk. 
II 


PROTECTION  AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER 

BASIN. 


COMMITTEE  ON  IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 
Wednesday,  June  21,  1922 — Continued. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  would  like  to  present  Professor  Durand,  of  Stanford  University. 
Professor  Durand  is  a  graduate  of  the  Annapolis  Academy  and  has  served  in  the  United 
States  Xavy.  He  has  been  engaged  in  research  work  for  the  Government  on  water 
propellers  and  more  recently  on  air  propellers.  He  was  professor  of  marine  engineering 
at  Cornell  University  and  at  present  is  professor  of  mechanical  engineering  at  Stanford 
University.  During  the  war  he  was  chairman  of  the  Advisory  Committee  for  Aeronau- 
tics and  was  later  scientific  attache  at  Paris.  He  was  the  connecting  link  between 
the  United  States  Government  and  the  Allies  on  war  research.  He  is  a  member  of 
the  -board  of  consulting  engineers  of  San  Francisco  on  the  Hetch  Hetchy  project  and 
has  been  a  member  of  the  Los  Angeles  Hydro  Electric  Consulting  Board  since  1909. 

STATEMENT  OF  PROF.  W.  F.  DURAND. 

Professor  DURAND.  I  should,  perhaps,  explain  that  the  reason  I  am  appearing  before 
this  committee  (my  primary  connection  being  as  a  professor  in  Stanford  University) 
is  due  to  the  fact  that  during  the  entire  period  of  the  development  of  the  municipal 
power  system  of  Los  Angeles  I  have  been  in  association  with  those  undertakings  in 
a  consulting  capacity  and  have,  therefore,  had  an  opportunity  of  becoming  familiar 
with  the  power  problems  of  Los  Angeles  as  a  city  and,  in  a  considerable  degree,  with 
those  affecting  the  southern  part  of  California,  and,  of  course,  in  some  lesser  degree 
the  entire  section  of  the  Southwest. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Were  you  employed  by  the  city? 

Professor  DURAND.  By  the  city,  yes.  Perhaps  I  should  also  say  that  my  contact  with 
these  problems  has  been  chiefly  technical  and  the  subjects  which  I  might  naturally 
discuss  before  this  committee  have  already  been  generally  covered  by  the  Director  of  the 
Reclamation  Service.  Any  detailed  discussion  of  these  phases  of  the  subject  would 
therefore  lead  to  a  repetition,  in  considerable  degree,  of  a  part  of  the  testimony  already 
presented  before  the  committee.  This  I  believe  to  be  unnecessary  and  I  shall,  there- 
fore, endeavor  to  restrict  my  comments  to  certain  features  which  were  not  so  fully 
dealt  with  by  the  Director  of  the  Reclamation  Service  and  to  certain  other  points 
which  may  be  of  interest  to  the  committee. 

Evidence  has  been  shown,  in  the  questions  which  members  of  the  committee  have 
asked,  regarding  the  very  keen  interest  which  they  take  in  the  problem  of  financial 
reinbursement,  the  problem  of  the  practicability  of  the  scheme  as  a  financial  and 
economic  undertaking,  and  I  wish  to  speak  to  that  point  briefly — that  is,  regarding 
the  question  of  the  prospective  market  for  powrer  as  we  see  it  in  the  southern  part  of  the 
State  of  California  and  generally  throughout  the  Southwest.  It  is  known,  I  take  it,  to 
most  members  of  the  committee,  that  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  has  already  developed 
power  along  the  line  of  the  aqueduct  to  the  extent,  in  round  numbers,  of  about  100,000 
horsepower;  the  remaining  capacity  of  the  aqueduct  and  of  the  streams  immediately 
tributary  thereto  represents  something  like  150,000  horsepower  more,  so  that  the  ulti- 
mate development  of  the  power  immediately  along  the  line  of  the  aqueduct— thinking 
merely  now  of  Los  Angeles  as  the  single  customer — will  be  represented  by  something 
like  2oO,000  horsepower.  The  present  demand  for  power  in  the  city  of  I.os  Angeles 
far  outruns  its  present  development  and  it  is  itself  at  the  present  time  a  large  purchaser 
of  power  i  rom  the  private  power  companies.  The  business  agent  of  the  city  of  I  os 
Angeles  in  recent  years  has  been  compelled  to  decline  discussion  with  large  prospective 
power  users  regarding  power  for  industrial  purposes  and  representing  an  aggregate  of 
something  like  100,000  horsepower.  That  is  to  say.  there  exists  at  prosMit  a  ^oid 
which  might  be  immediately  filled  or  filled  at  a  very  early  date  represented  by  some 
such  figure. 

63 


64  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   C'OLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  One  hundred  thousand  horsepower? 

Professor  DURAXU.  Yc.v 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  is  being  done  to  develop  this  other  150.000  horsepower? 

Professor  DURAND.  They  are  proceeding  as  rapidly  as  circumstances  will  permit. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  expect  in  due  course  to  develop  it  to  the  entire  limit? 

Professor  DURAND.  Yes.  sir;  I  am  coming  to  that  point  immediately.  The  annual 
increase  in  power  demand  in  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  in  recent  years  has  run  at  about 
20  per  cent,  so  that  looking  forward  into  the  future  it  is  a  20  per  cent  compound  interest 
program. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Annually? 

Professor  DURAND.  Annually,  yes.  sir;  for  the  increase  of  power.  And  what  is 
true  of  Los  Angeles  is  likewise  substantially  true  for  the  other  communities  in  the 
southern  part  of  the  State,  as  well  as  for  the  whole  Southwest  in  a  general  way.  At  this 
rate  of  increase  for  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  the  entire  capacity  of  its  aqueduct  power 
system  will  be  required  some  time  in  1925.  That  is  to  say.  if  Los  Angeles  is  able  to 
proceed  promptly  with  the  further  development  of  these  resources,  it  will  in  1925  have 
reached  the  limit  of  their  capacity  and  will  immediately  thereafter  be  in  the  market 
actively  for  other  blocks  of  power. 

Mr.  RAKER.  About  what  is  the  estimated  amount  now  required  by  the  cities  in 
southern  California  outside  of  Los  Angeles? 

Professor  DUKAND.  The  demand  for  power  in  southern  California  outside  of  Los 
Angeles  is  such  as  to  require  an  active  working  installation  of  something  over  400,000 
horsepower  capacity,  with,  or  course,  a  reasonable  excess  installed  capacity  to  insure 
continuity  of  service. 

Mr.  RAKER.  They  are  now  short  too,  are  they  not? 

Professor  DURAND.  There  is  a  definite  power  shortage  throughout  the  entire  southern 
part  of  the  State.  Ihis  is  especially  the  case  in  Los  Angeles,  and  what  is  true  of  Los 
Angeles  is,  I  am  confident  from  my  own  contact  with  the  situation  in  the  southern 
part  of  the  State,  likewise  true  of  other  municipalities  and  of  the  entire  section,  and 
it  is  likewise  true  with  regard  to  contiguous  States  and,  in  a  general  way,  the  entire 
section  which  would  be  related  to  the  Colorado  River  as  a  source  of  power.  In  fact, 
what  I  believe  to  be  a  conservative  estimate  covering  the  probable  increase  in  power 
demands  during  the  future  period  of  yeaie  seerrs  to  indicate  that  if  there  were  no 
further  supply  in  the  meantime,  the  shortage  within  a  pericd  of  seven  or  eight  years, 
certainly  by  the  time  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  was  completed  and  ready  for  service, 
would  be  sufficient  to  immediately  absorb  the  entire  amount,  and  by  the  entire  amount 
I  mean  600,000  continuous  horsepower. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  is  your  view  as  to  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  by 
the  Government  rather  than  by  private  individuals? 

Professor  DURAND.  I  think  the  Government  is  the  only  agency  which  should  un- 
dertake the  construction  of  the  dam. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Is  it  not  true  that  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  has  not  only  developed 
power  along  the  aqueduct  but  is  also  seeking  to  obtain  permission  to  develop  power 
sites  in  the  Sierra  Xevadas  north  of  Tehachapi  Pass,  Calif. ,  with  the  purpose  of  bringing 
the  power  down  to  the  city  of  Los  Angeles? 

Professor  DURAND.  I  do  not  know  to  what  extent  the  city  is  actively  interested 
in  the  actual  development  of  those  sites  but  I  know  it  has  made  some  surveys  and  has 
estimated  certain  possibilities.  Those  possibilities,  however,  were  not  included 
in  the  figures  which  I  gave  a  moment  ago. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  also  understood  that  there  was  objection  on  the  part  of  those  north 
of  the  Tehachapi  Pass  to  Los  Angeles  invading  their  territory  and  developing  the 
power  which  they  would  ultimately  need,  feeling  that  Los  Angeles  should  be  con- 
fined, as  to  its  source  of  power,  to  southern  California,  and  that  the  power  resources 
of  northern  California  be  ultimately  developed  and  used  for  the  development  of 
that  section  of  the  State. 

Professor  DURAND.  That  is  quite  true. 

Mr.  HARBOUR.  I  can  testify  to  that.  too.  Mr.  Hayden. 

Professor  DIRAND.  But  I  should  also  state,  as  far  as  I  can  speak  for  the  city  of  Los 
Angeles,  that  she  would  much  prefer  to  insure  in  some  way  an  adequate  supply  of 
power  from  the  Colorado  River  rather  than  from  these  other  sources  referred  to. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Has  Los  Angeles  an  application  now  pending  for  power  privilege*  on 
the  Colorado  River,  I  mean,  before  the  power  commission? 

Professor  DURAND.  I  think  there  were  certain  applications  filed  some  time  ago 
simply  for  the  purpose  of  insuring  what  might  be  called  a  hearing  for  Los  Angeles 
when  the  question  of  the  allocation  of  power  should  arise  or  in  case  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment should  not  proceed  with  the  undertaking  of  securing  for  the  city  an  oppor- 
tunity of  developing  such  power  for  herself. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLOEADO   RIVER   BASIN.  65 

Mr.  RAKER.  Then,  so  far  as  you  know,  California.  Nevada,  Arizona,  and  that  country 
are  sort  of  a  unit  in  favor  of  the  Government  commencing  on  this  Boulder  Canyon 
p!>sver  project? 

Professor  DURA.ND.  Yes;  I  so  understand,  and  I  know  furthermore  that  the  com- 
munities Lrcnerally  in  that  section  of  the  country  are  in  immediate  need  of  additional 
power  and  are  desirous  of  its  prompt  development  from  the  Colorado  Ri\  er.  To  come 
back  to  the  point  I  was  speaking  of — 

Mr.  liARBoru  i  interposing).  Before  you  leave  that,  could  you  give  us  any  state- 
ment as  to  the  amount  of  horsepower,  or  electric  energy  in  horsepower,  that  is  now 
used  by  the  city  of  Los  Angeles? 

Professor  DURAND.  The  present  developments  in  its  own  plants,  as  I  said  a  moment 
ago,  represent  100,000  horsepower. 

Mr.  l.ARnoru.  And  that  is  all  along  the  aqueduct? 

Professor  DURAND.  Yes,  sir.  It  is,  furthermore,  a  purchaser  of  power  to  a  large 
degree  and  I  am  sorry  I  am  unable  to  give  those  figures.  I  should,  perhaps,  state  foi 
the  benefit  of  the  committee  that  I  am  appearing  here  in  some  small  way  representing 
Mr.  Seattergood,  the  electrical  engineer  of  the  city,  who  is,  unfortunately,  ill  in  the 
hospital  and  is  unable  for  that  reason  to  appear  before  the  committee.  I  have  myself 
just  returned  from  Europe  and  was  caught  by  a  telegram  when  I  landed  in  New  York 
and  asked  to  come  over  here  to  assist  in  presenting  this  situation  before  the  committee. 
I  have  been  quite  familiar  with  certain  phases  of  these  problems  but  the  chief  elec- 
trical engineer  of  the  city  would  have  all  of  these  figures  at  his  fingers'  ends  while 
unfortunately  I  have  not.  Subsequent  examination  develops  the  figure  of  about 
160,000  horsepower  capacity  as  representing  the  present  total  requirements  of  the 
city  of  Los  Angeles,  with  proper  reserve  in  addition  to  insure  reliability  of  service. 

I  was  about  to  say  a  moment  ago,  with  regard  to  the  aggregate  amount  of  power 
which  will  be  developed  on  the  Colorado  River  at  Boulder  Canyon,  600,000  horsepower, 
that  unquestionably  the  interests  in  the  territory  to  be  served  from  that  site  will  not 
remain  without  some  further  power  development  in  the  meantime,  but  it  is  very 
sure,  as  far  as  we  can  in  any  way  humanly  forecast  the  situation,  that  the  future  power 
developments  within  the  next  six  or  eight  years  are  going  to  run  far  short  of  the  require- 
ments in  that  period,  so  that  at  the  time  the  Boulder  Canyon  project  shall  be  com- 
pleted and  ready  for  service  there  will  be  a  very  large  void  for  power  ready  to  be  filled 
up  promptly  from  that  source,  and  I  am  satisfied  in  my  own  mind  that  within  a  very 
short  period  of  time  after  the  completion  of  that  project  the  entire  output  of  the  plant 
will  be  required  and  can  be  marketed  at  figures  which,  as  I  shall  show  in  a  moment, 
will  represent  an  economic  security  for  the  money  invested. 

Furthermore,  I  believe  that  the  communities  interested  in  this  power  will  be  ready, 
on  the  completion  of  the  project,  to  become  immediately  responsible  not  only  for  such 
an  amount  of  power  from  the  Boulder  Canyon  plant  as  shall  represent  their  immediate 
deficits,  but  also  for  such  further  amounts  as  will  anticipate  to  some  extent  their 
future,  and  that  in  this  manner  the  section  of  the  country  interested  in  this  power 
will  be  ready  to  assume  responsibility  for  the  entire  output  of  the  plant  and  thus 
relieve  the  Government  of  all  carrying  charges.  I  believe  that  I  am  justified  in  say- 
ing that  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  is  ready  to  assume  such  responsibility  to  an  extent 
far  beyond  its  presumable  deficit  of  power  at  the  time  the  Boulder  Canyon  project  is 
ready  for  service,  and  I  am  confident  that  other  communities  will  in  like  manner 
wish  to  safeguard  against  their  future  growth.  I  believe  that  on  a  conservative  esti- 
mate, from  one-halt  to  two-thirds  of  the  total  output  will  be  immediately  required 
by  the  time  the  project  is  ready  for  service  and  that  responsibility  for  the  balance 
will  he  eagerly  accepted  by  communities  interested,  thus  covering  the  entire  carry- 
ing charges — as  already  stated . 

Mr.  RAKER.  Through  what  means  and  from  what  source  are  you  going  to  secure  the 
power  you  say  you  need  between  now  and  the  time  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  is 
completed? 

Professor  DURAND.  The  private  power  companies  in  the  southern  part  of  the  State 
have  still  other  projects  in  contemplation  and  in  progress  of  development.  These 
projects,  by  and  large,  will  cost  more  per  unit  than  will  the  power  at  t  he  IJoulder  Can- 
yon Dam,  but  the  customers  will  not  wait;  there  will  be  a  market  for  power  which 
will  justify  the  development  of  some  considerable  amounts  in  the  meantime  but  I 
can  not  undertake  to  say  how  much. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Is  it  your  view  that  the  private  individuals  and  concerns  that  are  now 
developing  power  arid  will  have  developed  it  by  eight  years  from  now,  if  the  Boulder 
( 'anyon  Dam  is  completed  in  eight  years,  will,  at  the  time  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam 
is  working,  lose  their  customers? 

Professor  DURAND.  Xo.  I  mean,  they  will  not  be  able  to  develop  power  enough 
to  supply  the  market. 


66  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

Mr.  RAKER.  In  the  meantime? 

Professor  DURAXD.  Yes. 

Mr.  RAKER.  When  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  is  completed  and  600.000  horsepower 
is  developed  will  these  private  indiduals  and  concerns  be  put  out  of  business? 

Professor  DVRAXD.  Xo:  I  take  it  they  will  not  be  put  out  of  business,  but  there 
may  be  required  some  readjustment  of  rates. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Of  course,  that  would  be  one  of  the  things  to  be  adjusted,  but  Mr. 
Hoover  says  that  all  of  those  things  are  now  adjusted  by  commissions  and,  therefore, 
we  do  not  have  to  worry  about  them,  but  if  in  the  next  8  or  10  years  there  was  a  large 
development  outside  of  Los  Angeles  by  these  private  concerns  and  private  individuals 
to  supply  the  demand  that  is  increasing  all  the  time,  I  was  wondering  whether  or  not 
by  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  they  would  thereby  be  put  in  the 
position  that  their  property  would  be  practically  worthless? 

Mr.  HARBOUR.  Would  not  the  developments  in  the  other  parts  of  the  State  result 
in  the  consumption  of  all  that  power?  Even  though  Los  Angeles  did  not  use  it  other 
sections  would  be  developing  and  thus  result  in  a  demand  for  more  power  in  those 
s?ctions. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  was  trying  to  get  the  professor's  view  on  that. 

Professor  Di  HAND.  My  opinion  as  to  that  point  is  this:  That  there  will  possibly 
be  required  some  careful  consideration  of  rates  on  the  part  of  the  rate-making  power 
at  that  period  of  time,  but  I  do  not  foresee  the  putting  out  of  business  of  any  of  these 
present  or  even  immediately  prospective  power  plants.  I  believe,  furthermore,  it 
is  a  fact  that  certain  of  these  power  companies  are  looking  forward  with  considerable 
care  to  the  projects  which  they  propos?  undertaking  in  the  immediate  future,  having 
an  eye  on  the  possibilities  of  the  developments  at  Boulder  Canyon  Dam:  they  are, 
in  other  words,  discounting  to  some  extent  the  possible  developments  at  Boulder 
Canyon  Dam. 

To  develop  this  thought  in  a  little  further  detail,  I  should  consider  that  by  the  time 
the  Boulder  Canyon  project  is  ready  for  power  service,  the  actual  deficit  or  void  await- 
ing to  be  filled  will  amount  to  one-third  of  the  total  output  or  more,  and  this  without 
counting  on  more  than  the  normal  growth  in  present  modes  of  power  use.  Additional 
or  new  industrial  uses  of  hydropower,  stimulated  by  favorable  rates,  will  undoubtedly 
be  planned  for  operation  concident  with  the  completion  of  the  project.  Among  such 
uses  mention  may  be  made  of  irrigation  pumping,  mining  and  chemical  industries  and 
the  electrification  of  railroads  in  the  section  within  economic  reach  of  this  source  of 
power.  It  is  a  matter  of  common  knowledge  that  the  Sante  Fe  Railroad  is  already 
manifesting  an  active  interest  in  the  possibilities  of  power  from  this  source.  Those  new 
or  extended  uses,  over  and  above  what  may  lie  termed  normal  growth,  will  easily  carry 
the  total  demand  at  the  completion  of  the  project  to  the  amount  of  one-half  or  two- 
thirds  the  total  output,  as  stated  at  an  earlier  point. 

This  would  leave  say  one-third  of  the  output  only,  as  reserve  against  future  growth, 
an  amount  representing  only  a  moderate  provision  against  the  future  and  certainly  in 
nowi-e  justifying  the  scrapping  of  any  of  the  earlier  existing  plants. 

Furthermore  there  are  certain  areas  served  by  these  existing  companies  which  would 
not  so  readily  come  within  the  scope  of  service  from  Boulder  Canyon  and  normal  growth 
within  such  areas  would  aid  in  furnishing  an  outlet  for  their  power  product. 

Again,  it  is  common  practice  with  power  companies,  as  the  time  approaches  for 
bringing  in  a  new  station  or  a  new  block  of  power,  to  allow  the  margin  of  reserve  power 
(power  capacity  over  and  above  that  normally  required  and  serving  as  an  insurance 
against  interruptions  in  service)  to  gradually  decrease,  thus  diminishing  the  margin 
intended  to  secure  reliability  and  continuity  of  service.  This  policy  will  undoubtedly 
be  followed  in  the  case  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  project  and  all  power  companies  will 
thus  anticipate  service  from  this  source  by  a  continuous  decrease  in  the  desirable 
margin  of  reserve  power  and  in  a  correspondingly  increased  use  of  their  steam  plants. 
This  is  what  was  referred  to  a  moment  ago  as  an  anticipation  of  or  a  discounting  of  the 
future  with  reference  to  the  influence  of  Boulder  Canyon  on  the  general  power  situa- 
tion. It  thus  results  that  a  considerable  block  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  power,  when 
brought  in.  may  be  considered  as  no  more  Jhan  restoring  the  proper  margin  of  reserve 
power  desirable  in  order  to  insure  continuity  .and  reliability  of  service. 

Taking  these  various  considerations  into  account,  it  seems  clear  that  there  need 
be  no  apprehension  that  the  advent  of  Boulder  Canyon  power  will  result  in  putting 
out  of  business  the  earlier  and  smaller  plants.  There  will  be  use  for  all  the  hydro- 
power  which  we  shall  be  able  to  develop. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Do  you  know  whether  or  not  the  city  of  Los  Angelee  is  in  a 
position  or  is  inclined  to  make  a  proposition  to  the  Government  to  take  over  and  use  a 
certain  amount  of  this  power  in  the  event  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  is  constructed, 
so  that  we  might  have  some  idea  as  to  when  the  Government  will  be  reimbursed  for 
its  expenditure? 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  67 

Professor  DURAND.  I  can  say  yes  to  that  question.  I  believe  the  city  of  Lcs 
Angeles  is  ready  to  make  an  immediate  proposition.  Just  what  the  tours  of  that 
proposition  might  be,  of  course,  I  am  not  prepared  to  state,  but  I  do  know  that  she 
is  so  anxious  to  insure  for  herself  an  adequate  supply  of  power  in  the  future  as  to 
be  quite  ready  to  enter  into  an  immediate  understanding  with  regard  to  the  point 
you  have  mentioned. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  It  has  been  represented  in  the  newspapers  that  at  least  cne- 
half  of  the  expense  of  constructing  this  dam  would  be  taken  care  of  by  power  sold 
to  the  city  of  Los  Angeles,  and  that  is  a  question  which  will  have  to  be  worked  out 
before  the  matter  comes  up  on  the  floor  of  the  House. 

Professor  DUHAXD.  Whether  it  will  be  one-half  or  some  other  fraction,  of  couree, 
I  could  not  tell  offhand  at  the  present  time,  but  I  am  sure  that  the  city  of  I  cs  A  ngelcs 
is  very  desirous  of  entering  into  some  understanding  in  regard  to  these  matters. 

Mr.  HARBOUR.  Mr.  Creswell,  I  understand,  intends  to  discuss  that  feature  of  the 
matter. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Possibly  I  did  not  make  myself  plain.  Taking  your  statement  as  to  the 
demand  for  power  during  the  next  10  years,  and  assuming  that  the  Boulder  Canyon 
Dam  will  not  be  completed  and  ready  for  10  years,  and  these  private  concerns  and 
private  individuals  proceed  to  develop  their  present  projects,  at  the  end  of  10  years 
will  there  be  a  demand  for  the  power  created  by  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  developments  of  the  private  concerns  and  private  individuals  I  have 
spoken  of,  that  will  justify  the  private  concerns  and  private  individuals  in  con- 
tinuing in  buisness  and  getting  a  fair  return  from  the  power  they  sell  to  the  public 
&s  .well  as  from  the  energy  to  be  taken  from  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam? 

Professor  DURAND.  Yes.  sir;  I  think  there  will  be;  I  think  the  demand  for  power 
will  l)o  :--o  in-oat  that  within  a  period  of  seven  or  eight  vears  it  will  absorb  the  output  of 
the  Boulder  Canyon  project  and  at  the  same  time  let  these  other  projects  continue 
on  a  reasonable  business  basis. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So  that  the  contemplated  construction  and  completion  of  the  Boulder 
<  'an von  Dam  v.ith  an  ultimate  capacity  of  (100,000  horsepov  er.  will  not.  in  your  view, 
interfere  with  the  general  development  now  contemplated  by  the  private  concerns 
and  private  individuals  for  the  purpose  of  building  up  the  countrv  generally? 

Professor  DURAXD.  Xo.  sir;  it  will  not.  I  wiD  now  pass  to  the  next  point  which 
I  had  in  mind. 

A'r.  SINXOTT.  Would  you  prefer  to  go  on  and  not  be  interrupted  until  you  complete 
what  vou  have  to  say? 

Professor  DUKAXD.  Xot  at  all;  I  am  perfectlv  willing  to  be  interrupted  at  any  point. 
T  v  ill  now  s-.'v  a  T'ord  «ith  regard  to  the  possible  figures  at  which  this  pov- or  might  be 
sold.  Of  course-,  it  "ill  be  understood  that  any  such  estimates  are  entirelv  tentative 
in  character,  especially  go  far  in  advance  of  the  realization  of  any  part  of  the  project; 
sti'l  (  an  be  made  which  will  apparently  indicate  the  order  of  figure  at. which 

such  power  might  be  sold. 

I  have  taken  the  estimates  of  the  Director  of  the  Reclamation  Service  as  to  the  cost 
of  the  dam,  and  I  have  made  other  estimates  v.ith  regard  to  the  cost  of  the  power  plant 
and  machinery:  I  am  applying  fixed  charges  of  9.V  per  cent  which,  I  take  it,  will  be 
sufficient  to  cover  an  interest  charge  of  5  per  cent:  depreciation  on  such  part  of  the 
entire  plant  as  will  be  subject  to  depreciation  and  provision  for  the  retirement  of  the 
bonds  at  2J  per  cent:  this,  together  with  a  reasonable  operating  charge,  would  result 
in  a  total  annual  charge  of -about  $8, 000,000.  The  total  annual  output  of  the  plant, 
operated  as  the  equivalent  of  600,000  horsepower  continuous  throughout  the  year. 
would  be  3. <>20. 000. 000  kilowatt  hours,  and  this  works  out  nlni".-<  exactly  to  one-fifth 
of  a  cent  per  kilowatt  hour — that  is  to  say,  this  power  could  apparently  be  generated 
and  delivered  at  the  plant  with  a  fixed  charge,  which  would  insure  the  in1<'iv<! 
depreciation  where  required  and  retirement  of  bonds  at  a  charge  of  about  one-fifth 
of  a  cent  per  unit  or  kilowatt  hour. 

Mr.  SINXOTT.   It  is  now  12  o'clock.     What  is  the  wish  of  the  commit)' 

Mr.  S  \vixc.  Professor  Durand  must  leave  to-night. 

Mr.  SINXOTT.   Ilmv  much  more  time  do  you  wish? 

Professor  DURAND.  I  can  finish  very  promptly  and  it  would  be  a  great  privilege  to 
me  if  I  might  he  permitted  to  do  so. 

Now.  with  regard  to  the  cost  of  this  power  at  distant  points.  Such  cost  will  depend 
entirelv  on  how  much  is  taken  and  how  far  it  is  transmitto  1.  1  have  simply  taken 
an  illustrative  case.  I  have  assumed  one-third  of  this  total  amount  of  power  trans- 
mitted a  distance  of  280  miles,  which  would  lay  it  down  substantially  in  what  might 
be  called  the  center  of  gravity  of  the  power  market  of  the  southern  part  of  the  State 
of  California:  and  under  those  circumstances,  allowing  similar  charges,  etc..  i)  could 
be  laid  down  at  this  point  in  the  southern  part  of  the  State  of  California  for  about 


68  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

four-tenths  of  a  cent  per  kilowatt-hour.  It  would  then,  of  course,  remain  to  distribute 
it  in  further  detail.  Those  wlv>  are  familiar  with  the  cost  of  power  will  see  that  there 
is  here  a  very  attractive  possibility  f;>r  p.nver  users  and  at  the  same  time  at  rates 
which  should  provide  a  safe  economic  basis  for  the  return  of  the  investment,  and  not 
only  the  return  of  the  investment  but  of  the  interest  charges  at  the  same  time. 

In  this  connection  and  in  answer  to  a  question  asked  of  Mr.  Criswell  I  would  state, 
on  behalf  of  the  chief  electrical  engineer  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles,  that  the  losses 
in  transmission  over  a  distance  of  250  to  30Q  miles  and  at  a  voltage  of  220,000  volts 
will  average  not  far  from  10  per  cent  and  such  loss  has  been  assumed  in  the  illustrative 
case  assumed.  With  somewhat  higher  voltages  which  may  be  looked  for  in  the  future 
it  is  to  be  anticipated  that  this  loss  may,  perhaps,  be  somewhat  reduced. 

The  only  further  point  I  have  had  in  mind — and  which  I  do  believe  is  of  impor- 
tance— is  that  with  regard  to  the  significance  of  this  power  at  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  in 
reference  to  our  soil  reserves.  Last  week  while  here  I  had  a  conference  with  Director 
Smith  of  the  Geological  Survey  and  was  provided  by  him,  as  set  forth  in  authorized 
public  information,  with  the  latest  estimates  which  have  been  made  by  a  special 
commission  entrusted  with  the  duty  of  determining,  as  far  as  was  humanly  possible, 
the  amount  of  our  oil  reserves.  The  amount  of  such  reserves  is  represented  by  a 
figure  of  about  9.000.000.000  barrels,  according  to  the  best  estimate  which  can  humanly 
be  made  at  the  present  time. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Does  that  include  the  shale  oils? 

Professor  DURAND.  Xo:  I  believe  it  does  not  include  the  shale  oils;  it  is  basically 
the  oils  which  are  recoverable  by  methods  at  present  approved  and  in  use. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Is  that  in  the  entire  United  States  or  just  in  California? 

Professor  DURAND.  That  is  in  the  entire  United  States.  The  amount  of  the  re- 
serves correspondingly  on  the  Pacific  coast,  or  in  the  State  of  California,  is  2.000.000.000 
barrels. 

Mr.  RAKER.  How  does  your  estimate  as  to  what  this  power  could  be  produced  for 
at  the  Boulder  Creek  Dam  compare  with  the  cost  of  power  per  kilowatt  hour  now? 

Professor  DURAND.  It  is  distinctly  cheaper. 

Mr.  RAKER.  About  how  much? 

Professor  DURAND.  The  present  cost,  of  course,  is  extremely  variable,  depending 
on  circumstances. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Well,  on  the  average? 

Professor  DURAND.  I  should  say  perhaps  60  per  cent  of  the  average  cost  under  other 
conditions. 

Mr.  RAKER.  This  would  be  60  per  cent  cheaper? 

Professor  DURAND.  Xo:  40  per  cent  cheaper. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Forty  per  cent  cheaper  from  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  than  it  is  now 
produced  for? 

Professor  DURAND.  Yes.  sir.  However,  understand  that  that  is  a  very  general 
statement. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  understand. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Do  the  figures  you  have  give  the  length  of  time  it  would  take  us  to 
exhaust  the  9.000.000.000  barn-is.' 

Professor  DURAND.  I  was  just  coming  to  that.  Our  present  rate  of  production  is 
a  little  under  500.000,000  barrels  per  year  and  the  consumption  a  little  over  500.000.000 
barrels,  which  means  that  we  have  to  go  abroad  for  the  balance.  If  these  various 
conditions  should  continue  about  as  they  are  we  should,  exhaust  these  resources  in 
about  20  years. 

Director  Smith  points  out.  however,  that,  taken  by  itself,  this  statement  might  be 
misleading,  because  conditions  are  not  going  to  remain  as  they  are.  Our  production 
is  apparently  going  up  a  little  more;  it  is  progressing  toward  a  peak  and  then  it  will 
gradually  and  neceeaarily  decline.  On  the  other  hand,  the  future  alone  can  determine 
as  to  where  our  consumption  may  go  in  the  meantime.  This  will  involve  questions  of 
world  supply,  of  our  representation  in  foreign  fields,  of  the  cost  of  imported  oil  and 
other  economic  and  industrial  factors.  But  as  Director  Smith  states,  we  shall  go  on 
producing  for  some  years  to  an  increasing  extent  and  then  the  production  will  gradually 
decline,  so  that  the  total  oil  reserves  in  the  United  States  will  last  beyond  the  20-year 
period.  That  is  to  say.  there  will  be  some  oil  of  the  reserves  above  referred  to 'still 
available  20  years  hence  and  some  30  years  hence. 

Mr.  Swixc;.   lint  importations  will  have  to  greatly  increase? 

Professor  DUKAXD.  Absolutely,  and  I  was  about  to  emphasize  that  very  poin-t. 
Importations  will  have  to  increase  in  order  to  balance  the  increased  consumption. 
Xow.  if  we  equate  the  power  at  Boulder  Canyon  into  fuel  oil  we  find  that  the  600.000 
horsepower  a  year  equated  into  terms  of  oil  represents  something  like  23.000,000 
barrels. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN.  69 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  And  the  supply  is  inexhaustible? 

Professor  DURAND.  And  the  supply  is  inexhaustible.  That  brings  me  to  another 
point,  and  I  am  glad  you  emphasized  it  in  that  way,  because  I  had  it  especially  in  mind 
to  point  out  this  fact:  That  when  we  are  using  oil  we  are  using  a  deposit  which  was 
made  by  nature — by  the  sun  primarily — thousands  or  millions  of  years  ago.  and  so 
far  as  we  know,  nature  is  not  engaged  in  the  program  of  making  oil  at  the  present  time. 
Here  is  a  bank  deposit  which  lay  untouched  through  geologic  ages  until  a  few  years 
ago,  when  we  found  out  how  to  use  it.  We  are  now  using  up  our  principal,  and  when 
anyone  constantly  draws  on  his  bank  principal,  and  there  is  no  interest  accruing,  there 
is  only  one  end  to  the  program.  If  instead,  however,  we  utilize  present  day  sun 
power — which,  of  course,  water  power  is — we  are  drawing  on  and  living  on  an  interest 
account,  and  there  is  going  to  be  just  as  much  next  year  as  there  was  last  year,  and  so 
on  through  an  indefinite  period  of  years.  It;  therefore,  seems  of  the  most  fundamental 
and  serious  importance  that  we  should  do  our  utmost  to  conserve  the  use  of  fuel  oil 
wherever  possible  by  substituting  therefor  this  interest-bearing  account  represented 
by  water  power. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Not  to  be  facetious,  but  really  for  information,  when  did  old  nature 
cease  to  produce  this  oil? 

Professor  DURAND.  Petroleum  oils  have  apparently  been  formed  in  all  geologic  ages 
from  the  Devonian  through  the  CarboniferoOs  down  to  the  Pleocene  and  Pleistocene, 
but  presumably  not  in  significant  quantities  since  the  latter  period. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  was  before  my  time,  so  I  do  not  care  to  go  into  it. 

Professor  DURAND.  There  is  one  further  point  in  this  connection  to  which,  I  think, 
attention  should  lie  drawn. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  It  seems  to  me  the  facts  you  are  stating  should  be  the  basis  of 
a  very  good  argument  in  favor  of  this  legislation,  because  it  would  save  the  consump- 
tion of  fuel  oils. 

Professor  DURAND.  Quite  so,  and  I  feel  that  it  is  a  very  important  argument.  And 
there  is  a  further  point,  which  relates  to  the  same  fundamental  question.  Petroleum 
furnishes  a  wide  range  of  products:  thus  the  lighter  products,  such  as  gasoline,  kero- 
sene, engine  distillate,  etc.,  then  heavier  fuel  oils,  and  again  that  mcst  important  series 
of  products,  the  lubricating  oils.  Indeed  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  industrially 
the  entire  world  is  lubricated  by  these  special  petroleum  products. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  will  ask  that  Professor  Durand  be  permitted  to  file  later  a  written 
statement  amplifying  the  remarks  he  has  made  to-day. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Without  objection,  that  may  be  done. 

Professor  DURAND.  In  that  connection  let  me  add  that  water  power  represents  a 
practicable  and  effective  substitute  for  fuel  oil  used  for  power  purposes.  This  is  not 
true  for  the  lighter  petroleum  products,  and  especially  for  the  lubricating  oils.  It  is 
thus  clear  that  there  are  certain  products  which  we  derive  from  petroleum  and  which 
are  fundamentally  necessary  in  our  modern  civilization  and  which  can,  so  far  as  we 
can  see,  be  derived  from  no  other  source.  This  serves  to  further  emphasize  the  serious 
import  of  this  entire  question  of  the  use  of  our  petroleum  oil  and  points  to  the  absolute 
importance  of  substituting  water  power  for  oil  fuel  power  wherever  humanly  possible 
to  do  so,  thus  conserving  pur  petroleum  reserves  as  far  as  possible  for  those  uses  for 
which  no  substitute  is  available. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Is  it  your  view  that  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam 
would  be  justified  for  the  generation  of  power  alone? 

Professor  DURAND.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  is  your  view  as  to  whether  or  not  the  Government  should  under- 
take the  enterprise  or  private  individuals  or  corporations  undertake  it? 

Professor  DURAND.  Are  you  speaking  of  the  dam? 

Mr.  RAKER.  The  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  and  all  this  development. 

Mr.  SWING.  You  mean  from  a  power  point  of  view? 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  am  speaking  about  power.  He  said  it  would  justify  its  construction 
for  power.  I  am  asking  for  the  professor's  point  of  view  as  a  man  of  great  experience, 
as  to  the  relative  advantage  of  having  the  Government  construct  it,  or  having  it  con- 
structed by  private  enterprise. 

Professor  DURAND.  As  I  see  it,  Mr.  Raker,  the  only  agent  which  could  adequately 
proceed  with  the  construction  of  such  engineering  work  is  the  National  Government, 
having  in  view  particularly  the  interrelation  of  the  problems  of  irrigation,  flood 
control,  and  the  settlement  of  the  various  questions  in  controversy  among  the  several 
States  that  will  arise  not  only  in  connection  with  the  construction  of  the  work,  but 
later  on  in  connection  with  trie  operation  of  the  reservoir.  I  believe  that  the  Federal 
Government  is  the  only  agent  which  could  undertake  this  proposition,  especially 
having  in  view  this  particular  aspect  of  the  situation. 


70  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX. 

I  would  further  point  out,  however,  that  in  my  opinion  it  is  most  desirable  and  most 
important,  both  for  the  Federal  Government  and  for  the  communities  or  political 
subdivisions  interested,  that  provision  be  made,  as  in  section  5  of  the  pending  bill, 
for  time  payments  on  the  capital  cost  of  the  project,  thus  constituting  in  a  way  these 
communities  or  political  subdivisions  as  partners  with  the  Federal  Government  in 
the  enterprise  and  greatly  reducing  the  capital  outlay  required  from  the  Federal 
Treasury. 

Mr.  HARBOUR.  Have  you  made  any  estimate  of  the  time  when  the  Government 
would  be  fully  reimbursed  by  the  sale  of  power? 

Professor  PURAND.  An  annual  charge  of  2i  per  cent  invested  on  a  sinking  fund  basis 
at  5  per  cent  interest  would  provide  for  the  retirement  of  the  bonds  in  a  period  of  about 
23  years.  Section  5  of  the  pending  bill  provides  for  distributed  annual  paymen's 
covering  capital  cost  in  25  years.  I  believe  that  the  territory  interested  in  this  project 
will  be  eager  to  take  power  from  this  source  at  figures  which  v\ill  insure  the  repayment 
of  the  capital  expenditure  in  a  period  of  25  or  30  years,  and  including  as  well,  all 
interest  charges  on  the  same. 

Regarding  the  matter  of  oil  reserves  I  would  like  to  mention  one  further  point,  and 
that  is  that  there  is  in  that  section  of  the  country,  immediately  tributary  to  the  Colo- 
rado River,  a  consumption  of  oil  annually  of  something  like  13,000.000  barrels  by  the 
railroads.  That  is  one  item  which  apparently  could  be  wiped  off  the  slate  of  con- 
sumption, once  we  bring  about  the  utilization  of  electrical  power  by  the  railroads 
which,  of  course,  is  contemplated  as  one  of  the  definite  features  of  the  market  for  this 
power.  In  addition  to  that  something  like  4,000.000  barrels  are  being  burned  under 
boilers  in  miscellaneous  ways,  making  at  the  present  time  an  aggregate  of  17,000.000 
barrels  that  could  be  immediately  saved.  This  figure  of  23,000,000  barrels  per  year 
represents  therefore  a  very  definite  and  important  item  of  saving,  having  in  view  our 
total  California  reserves  of  something  like  2,000,000,000  barrels. 

Or  again,  looking  beyond  the  Boulder  Canyon  project  to  the  total  power  possibilities 
of  the  Colorado  River,  we  should  have  a  total  fuel  oil  equivalent  of  some  10  times  as 
much  or  230,000,000  barrels  per  year,  which  is  something  more  than  one-tenth  of  the 
entire  reserve  of  fuel  oil  in  the  California  region  at  the  present  time. 

All  these  things  drive  home,  it  seems  to  me,  the  very  great  importance  of  realizing 
at  the  earliest  practicable  moment  this  vast  undertaking  of  national  conservation. 

There  are  many  other  points  of  which  mention  might  be  made,  but  I  will  not  take 
up  the  time  of  the  committee  further. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  will  ask  permission  that  the  statement  of  the  Geological  Survey  be 
made  a  part  of  the  record. 

Mr.  SIXNOTT.    Without  objection,  that  may  be  inserted  in  the  record. 

We  are  very  much  obliged  to  you,  Professor,  for  your  very  interesting  and  instruc- 
tive statement. 

(The  statement  of  the  Geological  Survey  is  as  follows:) 

THE   OIL  SUPPLY  OF  THE    UNITED   STATES — ESTIMATES    MADE    BY   THE   COUNTRY'S 
FOREMOST   OIL   GEOLOGISTS. 

A  review  of  the  producing,  probable,  and  possible  oil-bearing  regions  in  the  United 
States  by  a  joint  committee  composed  of  members  of  the  American  Association  of 
Petroleum  Geologists  and  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey  has  resulted  in  an 
inventory  estimate  that  9,000,000,000  barrels  of  oil  recoverable  'by  methods  now  in 
use  remained  in  the  ground  in  this  country  January  1.  H)22. 

Unlike  our  reserves  of  coal,  iron,  and  copper,  which  are  so  large  that  apprehension 
of  their  early  exhaustion  is  not  justified,  the  oil  reserves  of  the  country,  as  the  public 
has  frequently  been  warned,  appear  adequate  to  .supply  the  demand  for  only  a  limited 
number  of  years.  The  annual  production  of  the  country  is  now  almost  half  a  billion 
barrels,  but  the  annual  consumption,  already  well  beyond  the  half  billion  mark,  is 
still  growing.  Tor  some  years  we  have  had  to  import  oil,  and  with  the  growth  in  de- 
mand, our  dependence  on  foreign  oil  has  become  steadily  greater,  in  spite  of  our  own 
increase  in  output.  It  is  therefore  evident  that  the  people  of  the  United  States  should 
be  informed  as  fully  as  possible  as  to  the  reserves  now  left  in  this  country,  for  without 
such  information  we  can  not  appraise  our  probable  dependence  upon  foreign  supplies 
of  oil,  on  the  expanding  use  of  which  so  much  of  modern  civilization  depends. 

Fortunately  estimates  of  our  oil  reserves  can  be  made  with  far  greater  completeness 
and  accuracy  than  ever  before.  During  the  last  eight  years  a  large  part  of  the  territory 
in  the  United  States  that  may  possibly  contain  oil  has  been  studied  in  great  detail  by 
oil  ge-i!ii,';-is:  wildcatting  has  spread  through  "prospective"  into  many  regions  of 
"possible"  and  locally  even  into  regions  of  "impossible"  territory;  old  fields  have 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN.  71 

been  definitely  outlined  and  new  ones  discovered;  and  finally,  improvement  in 
methods  and  special  training  in  the  calculation  of  oil  reserves  and  of  the  depletion  of 
oil  properties  have  been  developed  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  tax  laws.  Ac- 
cordingly, in  order  that  the  public  may  get  the  fullest  benefit  of  this  newly  available 
information,  the  United  States  Geological  Survey  in  March,  1921,  invited  the  American 
Association  of  Petroleum  Geologists  to  cooperate  with  it  in  a  review  of  the  producing, 
probable,  and  possible  oil  territory  of  the  United  States  and  in  the  compilation  of  an 
estimate  of  the  petroleum  remaining  in  the  ground  and  recoverable  by  present  methods. 
This  invitation  was  promptly  accepted  by  the  association,  which  designated  a  number 
of  its  ablest  members  of  well-known  wide  experience,  good  judgment,  and  high  pro- 
fessional standing  to  serve  with  the  oil  geologists  of  the  survey  as  members  of  a  joint 
committee. 

The  committee  responsible  for  the  original  preparation  of  the  estimates  and  finally 
for  the  adjustment  and  revision  of  the  results  in  joint  conference  comprised  F.  W. 
DeWolf,  State  geologist  of  Illinois:  W.  E.  \V rather,  of  Dallas,  Tex. ;  Roswell  H.  Johnson, 
of  Pittsburgh,  Pa.:  Wallace  A.  Pratt,  of  Houston,  Tex.;  Alexander  W.  McCoy,  of 
Bartlesville,  Okla.;  Carl  H.  Beal,  of  San  Francisco,  Calif.:  C.  T.  Lupton,  of  Denver, 
Colo.;  Alexander  Deussen,  of  Houston,  Tex.:  K.  C.  Heald,  of  Washington,  D.  C.; 
and  G.  C.  Matson,  of  Tulsa,  Okla.,  all  representing  the  American  Association  of 
Petroleum  Geologists:  and,  for  the  Federal  Survey,  David  White,  chief  geologist, 
chairman:  W.  T.  Thorn,  jr.,  A.  E.  Fath,  Kirtly  F.  Mather,  R.  C.  Moore,  State  geologist 
of  Kansas,  and  K.  C.  Heald.  Mr.  Heald  represented  both  the  survey  and  the  asso- 
ciation. These  men  were  assisted  in  subcommittees  by  a  large  number  of  the  leading 
oil  geologists  of  the'country,  including  oil-company  geologists,  directors  of  State  geo- 
logical surveys,  and  consulting  geologists,  who  were  especially  familiar  with  the 
regions  considered.  All  these  cooperated  whole-heartedly  in  the  canvas  of  our  oil 
reserves,  and  many  oil  companies  also  furnished  confidential  data  for  use  in  the 
preparation  of  estimates. 

The  calculations  of  the  oil  reserves  in  the  proved  and  discovered  fields  are  reasonably 
reliable,  and  those  for  regions  regarded  by  the  geologists  as  embracing  "probable" 
future  oil  fields  are  based  on  all  the  available  data  and  are  entitled  to  high  respect, 
but  the  committee  wishes  it  most  clearly  understood  that  the  estimates  of  oil  in 
"possible"  territory  are  absolutely  speculative  and  hazardous  and  that,  although 
they  represent  the  best  judgment  of  the  geologists,  they  nevertheless  may  be,  at 
least  in  part,  wildly  erroneous.  The  questions  involved  are  not  only  how  much  a 
particular  doubtful  region  will  yield,  but  whether  it  will  furnish  any  oil  whatever. 
On  the  whole  the  estimates  are  undoubtedly  the  best  that  have  ever  been  made  for 
the  United  States  and  better  than  have  hitherto  been  prepared  for  any  oil  country 
or  district  of  the  world . 

The  estimates  for  local  areas,  fields,  or  districts  have  been  consolidated  by  States, 
groups  of  States,  or  broad  regions  in  the  case  of  nonproductive  States. 

Estimated  oil  reserves  of  the  United  States,  by  States  or  regions. 

Barrels. 

New  York 100, 000, 000 

Pennsylvania 260,  000,  000 

West  Virginia 200, 000, 000 

Ohio 190,  000, 000 

Indiana  and  Michigan 70,  000,  000 

Illinois 440,  000,  000 

Kentucky,    Tennessee,    northern    Alabama,    and    northeastern    Mis- 
sissippi        175,  000,  000 

Missouri,  Iowa,  North  Dakota,  Wisconsin,  and  Minnesota 40,  000,  000 

Kansas 425,  000,  000 

Oklahoma 1,  340,  000,  000 

Northern  Louisiana  and  Arkansas 525,  000,  000 

Texas,  except  Gulf  coast (i70,  000, 000 

Gulf  coast,  Texas,  and  Louisiana 2, 100, 000,  000 

Colorado,  New  Mexico,  and  Arizona 50,  000,  000 

Wyoming 525,  000,  000 

Montana,  Nebraska,  and  South  Dakota 100.  ()0<).  000 

Utah,  Nevada,  Oregon,  Washington,  and  Idaho 80,  000,  000 

California 1,  850,  000,  000 

Eastern  Gulf,  Coastal  Plain,  and  Atlantic  Coast  States 10,  000, 000 


Total 9, 150,  000,  000 


72  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

The  New  England  States  are  regarded  as  top  unpromising  to  deserve  considera- 
tion. Most  of  the  northern  peninsula  of  Michigan  and  the  State  of  Minnesota  are 
placed  in  the  same  category.  The  small  quantities  allocated  to  some  other  States 
indicate  how  little  hope  these  geologists  have  of  finding  extensive  oil  fields  in  them. 
Some  of  these  very  doubtful  regions  will  give  no  oil,  but  others  will  make  good  the 
deficiencies.  The  estimates  are  as  a  whole  distinctlv  conservative. 

Of  the  total  estimated  oil  reserves  of  the  United  States,  amounting  in  round  num- 
bers to  9,000,000,000  barrels,  5,000,000,000  barrels  may  be  classified  as  oil  in  sight 
and  4,000,000,000  barrels  as  prospective  and  possible.  Rather  more  than  4,000,000,000 
barrels  should  be  assigned  to  the  heavy-oil  group.  These  oils  will  be  recovered 
mainly  in  the  Pacific  Coast,  Rocky  Mountain,  and  Gulf  States.  The  contents  of 
the  Lima-Indiana  region,  which  yields  oil  of  a  distinctive  type,  are  estimated  at 
40,000,000  barrels.  In  general,  the  so-called  paraffin  oils  of  moderate  and  high 
grade,  as  contrasted  with  the  heavier  oils,  amount  in  all  to  about  5,000,000,000  barrels. 
The  estimated  reserves  of  high-grade  oils  of  the  Appalachian  States  are  about 
725,000,000  barrels. 

The  estimated  reserves  are  enough  to  satisfy  the  present  requirements  of  the  United 
States  for  only  20  years,  if  the  oil  could  be  taken  out  of  the  ground  as  fast  as  it  is  wanted  . 
Should  these  estimates  fall  even  so  much  as  2.000.000,000  barrels  short  of  the  actual 
recovery,  that  error  of  22  per  cent  would  be  equivalent  to  but  four  years'  supply,  a 
relatively  short  extension  of  life.  However,  the  committee  expressly  decries  the  too 
frequent  assumption  that  inasmuch  as  the  estimated  reserves  appear  to  be  sufficient  to 
meet  the  needs  of  the  country  at  the  present  rate  of  consumption  for  20  years,  therefore 
the  reserves  will  be  exhausted  at  the  end  of  that  time  or,  at  most,  a  few  years  later. 
This  assumption  is  absolutely  misleading,  for  the  oil  pools  will  not  all  be  found  that 
length  of  time,  drilling  will  be  spread  over  many  years.,  as  the  pools  are  found,  and  the 
wells  can  not  be  pumped  dry  so  quickly.  Individual  wells  will  yield  oil  for  more 
than  a  quarter  of  a  century  and  some  of  the  wells  will  not  have  been  drilled  in  1950. 
In  short,  the  oil  can  not  all  be  discovered,  much  less  taken  from  the  earth,  in  20  years. 
The  United  States  is  already  absolutelv  dependent  on  foreign  countries  to  eke  out 
her  own  production,  and  if  the  foreign  oil  can  be  procured,  this  dependence  is  sure  to 
grow  greater  and  greater  as  our  own  fields  wane,  except  as  artificial  patroleum  may  be 
produced  by  the  distillation  of  oil  shales  and  coals,  or  some  substitute  for  petroleum 
may  be  discovered. 

All  the  estimates  except  those  for  one  region,  noted  below,  include  only  the  oil 
recoverable  from  the  ground  by  present  methods,  but  it  is  practically  certain  that  the 
percentage  of  oil  to  be  recovered  from  the  American  oil  fields  will  be  vastly  increased 
by  the  application  of  new  and  improved  methods  of  recovery.  At  present,  however, 
this  phase  of  production  may  be  regarded  as  in  the  experimental  stage.  Little  has  benn 
definitely  determined  as  to  the  applicability  of  "air  pressure,"  "water  drive,"  "gas 
pressure,"  "vacuum  extraction,"  and  other  new  methods  to  different  regions,  with  their 
variation  in  conditions,  or  to  the  increase  in  production  to  be  counted  on  from  the  use 
of  these  methods.  The  committee  therefore  feels  that  at  present  any  estimates  of  such 
possible  additional  recoveries  would  probably  contain  errors  enormously  greater  than 
those  inherent  in  the  estimates  made  on  the  basis  of  methods  now  in  use.  In  only  one 
region  are  the  geologic  conditions  so  well  known  and  the  experience  with  improved 
methods  on  a  commercial  basis  so  extensive  and  so  long  continued  as  to  justify  the 
formulation  of  estimates  based  on  the  results  obtained.  This  is  the  region  in  north- 
western Pennsylvania  and  southwestern  New  York  where  the  "water  drive"  is  now 
employed  to  obtain  oil  from  the  Bradford  sand,  which  was  supposed  to  be  largely  ex- 
hausted. Under  the  peculiar  conditions  there  the  use  of  this  method  will  result  in  the 
recovery  of  a  large  quantity  of  oil  that  can  not  be  recovered  by  ordinary  methods  of 
production.  Allowance  for  the  additional  oil  thus  recovered  has  therefore  been  made 
in  the  estimates.  It  has  already  been  found,  however,  that  this  method  is  not  appli- 
cable to  some  other  districts,  and  accordingly  no  allowance  has  been  made  for  possible 
additional  recovery  through  its  use  where  its  suitability  to  the  local  conditions  has  not 
been  actually  demonstrated. 

In  the  light  of  these  estimates  as  to  the  extent  of  our  supplies  of  natural  petroleum, 
the  joint  committee  points  out  the  stern  obligation  of  the  citizen,  the  producer,  and 
the  Government  to  give  most  serious  study  to  the  more  complete  extraction  of  the  oil 
from  the  ground,  as  well  as  to  the  avoidance  of  waste,  either  through  direct  losses  or 
through  misuse  of  crude  oil  or  its  products. 

(Thereupon  the  committee  adjourned  to  meet  to-morrow.  Thursday,  June  22,  1922, 
at  10.30  o'clock.) 

X 


PROTECTION   AND   DEVELOPMENT   OF 
LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN 


HEARINGS 


BEFORE  THE 


SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGRESS 

SECOND  SESSION 
/ 

ON 

H.  R.  11449 

By  Mr.  SWING 

A  BILL  TO  PROVIDE  FOR  THE  PROTECTION  AND  DEVELOPMENT 
OF  THE  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN 


PART  3 


JUNE  22,  23,  24,  1922 


WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT   PRINTING   OFFICE 
131(i  1922 


COMMITTEE  ON  IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS. 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES. 
SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGRESS,  SECOND  SESSION. 

MOSES  P.  KINKAID,  Nebraska,  Chairman. 

NICHOLAS  J.  SINNOTT,  Oregon.  CARL  HAYDEN,  Arizona. 

EDWARD  C.  LITTLE,  Kansas.  C.  B.  HUDSPETH,  Texas. 

ADDISON  T.  SMITH,  Idaho.  JOHN  E.  RAKER,  California. 

JOHN  W.  SUMMERS,  Washington.  HOMER  L.  LYON,  North  Carolina. 

HENRY  E.  B  ARBOUR,  California.  WILLIAM  B.  BANKHEAD,  Alabama. 

E.  O.  LEATHERWOOD,  Utah. 
WILLIAM  WILLIAMSON,  South  Dakota. 
SAMUEL  S.  ARENTZ,  Nevada. 
MANUEL  HERRICK,  Oklahoma. 

A.  R.  HUMPHREY,  Clerk. 


PROTECTION  AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER 

BASIN, 


COMMITEE  ON  IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Thursday,  June  22,  1922. 

The  committee  met  at  10.30  o'clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  Edward  C.  Little  presiding. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Gentlemen,  the  committee  will  please  come  to  order.  I  under- 
stand that  Mr.  Bacon  is  to  speak  first  this  morning. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Before  you  proceed  with  that,  Mr.  Chairman,  there  has  been  so 
much  said  about  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  the 
case  of  the  State  of  Wyoming  versus  the  State  of  Colorado,  the  Greeley-Poudre 
irrigation  district,  and  the  Laramie-Poudre  Reservoirs  &  Irrigation  Co.,  that 
I  would  ask  that  the  decision  in  that  case,  No.  3.  original.  October  term,  1921, 
'be  printed  in  the  record,  so  as  to  have  it  at  the  beginning  here.fc 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Is  there  any  objection?    If  not,  that  will  be  done. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  have  the  decision  here. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Might  I  suggest.  Judge,  that  probably  you  do  not  want  to  put 
it  all  in?  You  might  designate  the  parts  that  you  wish  to  insert. 

Mr.  RAKER.  No ;  there  is  nothing  that  you  can  leave  out  in  reading  it. 

The  decision  referred  to  by  consent  of  the  committee  is  to  be  printed  follow- 
ing the  statement  of  Director  Davis. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Now,  Mr.  Bacon,  will  you  address  the  committee?  Please  state 
your  name,  residence,  and  sufficient  of  your  antecedents  to  shed  light  upon  the 
reason  for  your  appearance  here. 

STATEMENT  OF  MB.  JOHN  L.  BACON,  MAYOR  OF  SAN  DIEGO,  CALIF. 

Mr.  BACON.  My  name  is  John  L.  Bacon,  mayor  of  the  city  of  San  Diego,  and 
representing  the  Southern  Branch  of  the  California  League  of  Municipalities. 

Some  time  ago  the  matter  of  Boulder  Canyon  was  brought  to  the  attention 
of  the  organization  in  California  which  represents  all  of  the  municipalities  of 
the  State  of  California — that  is,  the  League  of  California  Municipalities.  We 
had  not  realized  the  gravity  of  the  situation  and  knew  very  little  about  it.  This 
matter  was  brought  up  about  a  year  ago.  Some  information  was  given  at  that 
meeting  and  later  a  meeting  was  called  of  the  southern  branch  of  this  organiza- 
tion, known  as  the  Southern  Branch  of  the  California  League  of  Municipalities, 
and  action  was  taken  at  that  meeting  to  get  further  information  and  to  see 
what  could  be  done  to  relieve  this  serious  situation  in  the  Imperial  Valley.  We 
went  into  it  at  some  length,  and  about  that  time  various  Government  reports 
were  coming  in  ;  various  investigations  had  been  made  and  Mr.  Swing  introduced 
his  bill  before  the  House  which  you  are  now  considering. 

When  it  was  known  that  this  bill  was  coming  up  the  organization  got  further 
information  and  then  requested  that  some  representative  be  sent  on  to  Washing- 
ton to  lay  this  information  before  the  committee. 

The  one  thing  that  appeals  to  us  most  strongly  is  the  imminent  danger  of  flood 
in  the  Imperial  Valley.  We  did  not  even  realize  it  out  there  until  we  com- 
menced to  investigate.  You  see,  California  is  a  State  of  magnificent  distances, 
and  we  do  not  always  realize  our  neighbor's  difficulties. 

Before  coming  out  here  I  took  a  trip  down  into  Mexico  on  this  project  to  be 
sure  that  I  had  the  facts.  There  was  some  feeling  of  apprehension  before,  and 
after  going  down  there  there  was  a  feeling  of  actual  terror  in  connection  with 
it.  It  is  pretty  hard  to  point  out — I  did  not  realize  it,  and  I  realize  that  it  is 
infinitely  harder  to  give  any  idea  here  of  the  awful  danger  that  threatens  that 
valley. 

To  go  back  a  little  ways,  this  map  here  I  think  will  show  more  clearly  than 
anything  else  the  situation.  There  is  a  peculiar  condition  existing  here  that  I 

73 


74  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

do  not  think  exists  anywhere  else  in  this  country.  It  was  not  very  long  since 
that  the  ocean  beach  line  followed  this  line  up  around  through  here  [indicating 
map  of  Imperial  Valley  and  vicinity]  and  came  up  through  here.  This  was  all 
ocean.  When  I  say  "  not  very  long  since."  I  am  speaking  from  a  geological 
standpoint.  That  was  only  a  few  hundred  years.  Imperial  Valley  was  all  under 
water  at  that  time.  This  was  part  of  the  ocean  [indicating  Imperial  Valley 
and  vicinity]. 

The  Colorado  River,  coming  down  here  [indicating],  as  it  follows  down  its 
channel  brings  more  or  less  silt  with  it — dirt.  There  is  not  a  man  here  but 
what  has  watched  perhaps  these  little  spring  freshets  that  come  in  every  part 
of  the  country,  where  a  groove  or  a  gulley  will  be  washed  down  the  side  of  the 
hill,  and  then  when  you  reach  your  lowland  at  the  bottom,  where  it  is  flat,  the 
dirt  that  has  been  brought  down  from  that  gulley  will  spread  out  and  form 
sort  of  a  little  triangular  mound.  The  dirt  washing  down  the  side  hills  makes 
this  mound  and  builds  up  the  lowland.  You  have  probably  seen  some  lowlands 
built  up  3  or  4  feet.  That  is  exactly  what  took  place  here.  The  mud  which 
came  down  this  river  built  up  a  sort  of  a  delta  here  until  gradually  it  built  up 
a  mound  out  here  [indicating],  and  the  river  was  diverted  and  came  out  through 
here  where  these  dotted  Tnes  are  [indicating].  This  water  then  evaporated  and 
left  a  great  deep  basin  300  feet  below  sea  level,  and  there  is  no  way  to  drain  it; 
it  is  simply  a  basin  there  down  below  the  level  of  the  ocean. 

Now,  in  the  course  of  time  this  river  repeated  its  process,  and  instead  of 
filling  up  over  in  here  [indicating],  it  has  filled  up  this  portion,  with  the  result 
that  the  river  n*>w  is  attempting  to  break  back  into  irs  old  basin  [indicating]. 
It  did  break  through  in  1905.  and  it  took  a  year  and  a  half  to  stop  the  break. 
In  the  meantime  the  Saitoh  Sea  was  gradually  filling  up.  S'nce  that  date  this 
whole  delta  has  filled  up  about  13  feet. 

You  can  get  some  idea  of  the  amount  of  mud  brought  down  that  river  when 
from  a  rough  calculation  it  is  found  that  that  mud.  if  dumped  on  the  District 
of  Columbia,  would  raise  the  level  of  the  land  in  the  District  of  Columbia  about 
3  feet  every  year.  In  other  words,  there  is  enough  mud  ;n  that  river  to  put  a 
layer  of  mud  3  feet  deep  over  the  entire  District  of  Columbia  every  year. 

Now.  here  is  the  situation :  A  series  of  levees  were  put  in  here  in  an  effort 
to  control  the  river.  Each  year  the  river  has  brought  down  this  mud  and 
built  up  the  delta  on  the  river  side  of  the  levee.  It  is  getting  higher  and  higher 
all  the  time.  We  checked  that  up  last  week.  Mr.  Swing  telegraphed  back  to 
get  the  actual  elevation,  and  we  found  that  since  1908  the  point  right  there 
at  Volcano  Lake  levee  [indicating]  has  risen  16  feet  higher  than  it  was.  That 
river  bed  has  raised  16  feet  since  1908.  This  point  is  about  35  feet  lower 
than  the  point  right  here  at  Bee  River  and  Pascadero  Cut  where  the  river  is 
now  [indicating]. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Will  you  say  that  again,  please? 

Mr.  BACON.  About  the  elevation? 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  BACON.  This  map  to-day  is  not  correct,  because  the  land  is  changing  so 
fast.  It  may  be  correct  to-day,  and  this  i<  as  dose  an  approach  to  correctness 
as  we  can  get.  That  just  shows  you  how  the  river  changes. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  In  what  way  is  it  not  correct? 

Mr.  BACON.  Because  the  river  bed  is  constantly  changing.  A  tree  may  come 
down  there,  lodge  against  the  side  of  the  levee,  and  the  current  may  scour  out 
and  break  the  levee,  simply  from  a  tree  coming  down.  That  could  happen  in 
half  an  hour,  and  has  happened  in  half  an  hour. 

Here  is  a  map  gotten  out  by  the  United  States  Geological  Survey  in  1908. 
It  is  not  quite  the  same  scale  as  that  map  is  [indicating],  but  you  can  see  what 
that  is,  as  shown  on  the  map  here.  Now,  that  map  was  correct  in  1908.  To-day 
all  of  this  land  down  in  here  has  been  filled  up.  with  the  result  that  that 
river  has  been  forced,  as  you  can  see.  off  to  the  left  toward  Imperial  Valley. 
This  year  an  effort  was  made  to  control  the  river  and  force  it  through  here 
at  Pascadero  Cut.  It  was  successful,  but  from  an  engineering  standpoint  I 
can  not  see  how  it  can  last  over  three  or  four  years.  It  is  a  race  against  time 
to  keep  the  river  out  of  that  valley.  If  it  ever  breaks  in,  I  don't  see  how  they 
can  ever  stop  it.  When  the  river  broke  here  in  1905,  it  washed  a  great  deep 
urull\ .  starting  here  at  Salton  Sea.  and  gradually  it  is.  working  back  across  the 
border  into  Mexico  beyond  Calexico  way  up  to  this  point.  Now.  that  gully 
only  has  about  35  miles  farther  to  go  to  hit  the  river  this  time.  That  time  it 
cut  over  40  miles.  Once  it  cuts  that  gully,  they  tell  us  it  will  scour  right  back 
up  here  and  probably  take  out  the  Yuma  Bridge,  part  of  the  town  of  Yuma, 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN.  75 

and  will  work  back  pretty  well  up  toward  Laguna  Dam.  Laguna  Dam  is  built 
on  bed  rock,  so  it  can  not  scour  out.  It  will  probably  be  a  century  and  a  half 
before  any  of  tbat  valley  can  ever  be  used  again  if  that  happens.  It  will  not 
fill  up  over  night,  but  it  will  fill  up  in  a  series  of  years.  You  can  not  stop  the 
river  once  it  breaks  through. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Now,  take  Volcano  Lake  and  the  dam  from  the  western  point. 
From  where  the  dam  begins  what  is  the  elevation  of  that  as  compared  with  the 
Gulf  of  Mexico? 

Mr.  BACON.  To-day  this  land  [indicating]  is  40  feet  above  sea  level.  This  is 
about  250  feet  above  sea  level. 

Mr.  RAKER.  But  I  just  wanted  to  get  before  the  committee  the  relative  eleva- 
tion along  Volcano  Lake,  where  the  embankment  is,  and  the  Gulf  of  Mexico. 
You  say  it  is  about  40  feet  elevation? 

Mr.  BACON.  About  40  feet.  This  is  40  feet  above  sea  level  right  at  that  point 
there  [indicating].  It  is  76  feet  above  sea  level  at  this  point  here  at  the  Vol- 
cano Lake  levee,  and  the  top  of  this  levee  is  28  feet  below  the  water  level  at 
Pasoadero  Cut  and  the  Bee  River. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  Please  designate  that  levee  so  that  we  can  refer  to  it  later  in  the 
record. 

Mr.  BACON.  The  Volcano  Lake  levee? 

Mr.  RAKEK.  That  commences  from  the  west,  or  on  the  west,  near  by  the  rail- 
road and  runs  on  across  to  the  point — how  is  it  marked  there? 

•Mr.  BACON.  Black  Butte. 

Mr.  RAKER,  About  what  is  the  size  of  Volcano  Lake  now? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  do  not  know.  I  do  not  want  to  give  you  that  information, 
because  I  do  not  have  it  correct,  and  Mr.  Nickerson  can  give  you  that  far  more 
accurately  than  I  can. 

Now.  in  order  that  you  might  have  some  idea  of  the  magnitude  of  this  I  took 
some  photographs  down  there.  These  photographs  are  less  than  a  month  old, 
so  that  they  are  fresh.  They  will  give  you  an  idea  of  the  condition.  This  was 
taken  right  up  there  at  the  point  marked  Bee  River  and  shows  the  levee  at  that 
particular  point. 

Here  is  another  photograph,  which  showTs  it  a  little  more  clearly,  and  a  third 
photograph  shows  the  intake  to  the  canal. 

Now.  just  to  show  some  of  the  difficulties  that  the  Imperial  Valley  people 
are  meeting  with  I  want  to  say  in  explanation  that  as  far  as  San  Diego  and 
some  of  the  cities  are  concerned  we  have  very  little  to  gain  or  very  little  to  lose 
in  connection  with  this,  excepting  as  Imperial  Valley  gains  or  loses.  That  is 
the  feeling  in  San  Diego,  but  we  feel  that  the  situation  there  is  so  serious  that 
it  is  our  neighbors  problem,  and  we  are  trying  to  do  everything  we  can  to  help 
them  solve  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Do  you  not  go  farther  than  that?  You  have  got  a  wonderful 
valley,  producing  almost  everything  on  earth,  with  a  wonderful  State  boulevard, 
a  highway  across  the  mountains,  and  also  a  railroad.  All  those  things  are 
concerned. 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes ;  but  we  consider  that  the  seriousness  of  our  neighbor's  posi- 
tion there — the  serious  difficulty  that  faces  them — is  the  thing  we  are  really 
worried  about.  If  that  river  should  break,  it  would  wipe  out  the  Southern 
Pacific  Railroad  down  here,  take  out  the  canal  system,  and  flood  the  valley;  it 
would  take  out  the  Southern  Pacific  Railroad  up  through  here  along  the  Salton 
Sea  [indicating]  :  it  would  wipe  out  that  region  there  absolutely. 

Mr.  I'ARKori:.  About  how  large  is  that  region  you  have  just  referred  to  that 
would  be  practically  destroyed? 

Mr.  BACON.  It  would  destroy  over  half  a  million  acres  of  as  fertile  land  as 
there  is  in  this  country. 

.Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Do  you  know  the  population  there  and  the  assessed 
valuation  of  the  property  that  is  in  jeopardy? 

Mr.  BACOX.  The  assessed  value  of  the  property  is  between  seventy-live 
and  one  hundred  million  dollars,  and  the  population  between  50,000  and 
75,000. 

Air.  RAKER.  That  is  all  on  the  California  side? 

Air.  BACON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  How  much  is  there  on  the  Mexican  side? 

Air.  BACON.  I  do  not  know. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Now.  I  am  not  at  all  squeamish  on  this  matter.  I  think  you 
people  ought  to  be  open  and  aboveboard  and  give  us  the  entire  territory 
involved  and  how  much  it  affects,  not  only  as  to  ourselves,  but  the  other  fellows. 


76  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN. 

because  you  people  are  dividing  that  water  now,  and  while  we  are  for  the 
United  States  I  believe  that  it  is  the  proper  thing  to  plan  out  the  whole 
question  involved  relative  to  what  we  are  working  on,  and  I  hope  you  will  not 
just  leave  out  the  other  fellow's  interests,  because  the  whole  railroad  to 
Yuma  until  it  gets  across  the  California  line  is  involved  also,  is  it  not? 

Mr.   BACON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  we  ought  to  see  the  whole  picture  at  once,  ought  we  not? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  BARBOTTB.  How  would  you  determine  the  assessed  valuation  of  land 
in  Mexico? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  would  not  determine  it,  because  I  do  not  have  the  information. 
I  am  not  trying  to  withhold  any  figures,  but  I  do  not  have  them. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Can  you  give  the  area  under  cultivation  and  the  num- 
ber of  people  on  the  farms? 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  did  not  mean  the  assessed  valuation.  The  only  thing  I  was 
asking  or  speaking  of  was  that  this  not  only  involves  the  railroad  which 
brings  traffic  from  the  East,  from  this  great  valley  on  into  San  Diego.  Los 
Angeles,  and  the  West  generally,  but  there  are  a  great  many  interests  and 
people  South  that  are  now  using  part  of  that  water. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  I  can  not  answer  that  question,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  As  Mr.  Nickerson  is  to  speak  later,  I  believe,  he  can  state  it 
then. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  That  data,  I  might  say,  is  all  included  in  the  Davis  report. 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes ;  on  page  20  you  will  find  that  matter  laid  out.  It  would 
mean  simply  quoting  figures  from  the  map  if  I  gave  them  to  you. 

Mr.  RAKER,  Well,  it  does  not  matter. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Will  you  please  mark  these  figures  before  you  go,  so  that  we 
will  know  just  what  they  are? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  What  is  your  profession.  Mr.  Bacon? 

Mr.   BACON.  Engineeer. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Civil  engineer? 

Mr.  BACON.  No,  sir;  I  have  had  general  engineering  practice  largely  on 
construction  work  out  in  California,  but  I  would  not  want  to  pose  as  an 
expert  in  connection  with  this  matter,  because  this  is  a  specialized  branch 
of  engineering  that  you  have  had  expert  advice  on  already  from  your  Recla- 
mation Department.  Our  feeling  is  just  this  in  connection  with  this  project: 
We  realize  the  danger ;  we  are  in  actual  fear,  almost  terror,  in  connection 
with  it.  We  do  not  want  to  even  suggest  how  it  should  be  corrected.  We 
believe  that  the  Government  departments  have  investigated  and  determined 
how  the  dangers  there  in  that  valley  can  be  righted,  and  we  are  simply  ac- 
cepting the  Government  reports  and  say  that  we  indorse  them  in  every  way. 

In  connection  with  this,  this  matter  has  been  taken  up  and  there  has  not 
been  one  single  dissenting  voice  among  the  California  cities  so  far  as  I  know. 
The  widest  publicity  that  we  can  give  in  a  short  time  has  been  given  to  it,  and 
I  have  original  indorsements  and  resolutions  that  have  been  passed  by  some 
20  cities  in  California,  adopted  since  the  1st  of  May.  in  support  of  the  pro- 
position. I  want  to  say  a  little  further  that  we  have  not  always  been  unani- 
mous in  our  opinions  out  there.  We  have  had  our  local  disputes.  There  has 
been  a  little  jealously  sometimes  between  the  cities,  but  in  this  particular  in- 
stance all  of  that  end  of  California  is  working  solidly  together. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  is  the  attitude  of  the  railroad  company  relative  to  this 
project,  so  far  as  it  affects  their  property,  do  you  know? 

Mr.  BACON.  They  are  anxious  to  see  it  go  through,  so  far  as  I  know.  I 
know  very  little  except  just  general  hearsay.  I  believe  these  is  a  feeling  of 
anxiety  on  their  part. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  is  the  attitude  of  the  Californians  who  own  the  Mexican 
land,  land  on  the  Mexican  border?  Do  you  know? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  do  not  know.  It  would  simply  be  hearsay,  anything  that  I 
could  say.  Mr.  Xickerson  can  give  you  exact  figures  in  connection  with  that. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Very  well. 

Mr.  BACON.  I  do  not  want  to  give  you  figures  that  I  am  just  guessing  at. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  How  much  time  have  you  spent  recently  in  Imperial  Valley  and 
in  this  adjacent  country? 

Mr.  BACON.  This  last  time? 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Yes. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIST.  77 

Mr.  BACON.  This  last  trip  I  was  only  down  there  three  days.  I  have  been 
there  going  to  and  from  the  Imperial  Valley,  I  presume,  for  six  or  eight  years. 
I  own  a  little  property  over  there,  but  not  tery  much. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Just  tell  us.  if  you  can,  how  the  expense  of  the  new  diversion 
dam  is  allocated  between  those  various  parties,  in  a  rough  way.  Part  of  the 
water  is  used  in  California,  part  is  used  across  the  Mexican  border,  and  the 
railroad  company  has  its  property  there.  Do  you  know  offhand  what  that 
division  is? 

Mr.  BACON.  All  I  can  do  is  to  give  you  the  information  I  got  from  their 
engineers.  The  engineers  told  me  that  all  of  the  protective  work  here,  every 
cent  that  is  spent  on  these  levees,  every  cent  that  is  spent  in  protecting  this 
property,  and  every  cent  that  is  spent  in  keeping  the  river  out,  is  paid  for  by  the 
land  in  Imperial  Valley  on  the  American  side  of  the  border;  that  the  Mexican 
lands  bear  no  share  whatever  in  this  protective  work. 

Mr.  BARBOUB.  And  all  of  that  protective  work  that  you  refer  to  lies  in  Mexico? 

Mr.  BACON.  It  all  lies  in  Mexico.  They  told  me  that  last  year — here  is  a 
very  interesting  thing  that  shows  you  some  of  the  difficulties  they  are  working 
under — they  told  me  that  last  year  they  spent  approximately  $60.000  in  duties 
which  were  paid  to  the  Mexican  Government  on  material  which  went  down  into 
Mexico  and  was  used  on  Mexican  soil  to  protect  this  land ;  that  over  half  a 
million  dollars  was  spent  on  this  protective  work,  and  that  the  $60,000  had  to 
be  paid  in  duties. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  tract  of  land  lying  north  and  west  of  this  embankment  is 
on  the  Mexican  side,  and  the  necessity  for  its  protection  is  the  same  as  that 
on  the  California  side? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  you  say  those  people  in  Mexico  have  paid  nothing  towards 
the  $60.000  that  you  have  been  talking  about? 

Mr.  BACON.  It  is  more  than  $60,000;  $60,000  was  simply  the  duty.  About  a 
half  million  dollars  was  spent  on  the  work  and  they  have  not  paid  one  cent  for 
this. 

Mr.  RAKER.  They  made  these  people  pay  a  duty,  and  then  they  paid  nothing 
for  putting  the  work  in? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir.  Here  is  another  example :  There  was  a  minor  break 
in  the  levee,  which  it  was  very  necessary  to  close.  Men  were  sent  down  there 
hurriedly ;  supplies  were  sent  down ;  a  train  was  made  up  carrying  emergency 
supplies  for  these  men  and  carrying  additional  men,  and  through  the  officious- 
iiess  of  some  under-official  in  Mexico  that  train  was  held  up  for  11  hours  at 
the  boundary  line  until  word  could  be  gotten  to  the  higher  Mexican  officials  to 
release  the  train  and  allow  it  to  go  down  into  Mexico.  That  is  just  one  of  the 
difficulties  that  is  met  with  in  that  connection. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  may  seem  a  little  peculiar  in  my  questions,  but  I  think  all  of 
these  matters  throw  light  on  why  you  people  are  figuring  for  the  ail-American 
canal. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Do  you  favor  this  all-American  canal  project? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir ;  it  does  not  seem  right  that  the  American  farmers  here 
in  this  district  should  be  at  the  mercy  of  the  Mexican  Government,  which  is 
here  to-day  and  gone  to-morrow.  The  Mexican  Government  changes  almost  as 
often  as  the  river  does. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Are  there  any  more  questions  to  ask  of  Mr.  Bacon? 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Has  the  question  been  discussed  among  the  people  in 
southern  California  as  to  the  advisability  of  negoti.-iting  with  the  Government 
of  Mexico  for  the  transfer  of  that  section  to  the  United  States? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  do  not  think  anything  could  be  done  by  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment that  would  be  hailed  with  greater  joy  than  the  acquiring  of  that  land 
down  in  Lower  California  by  this  Government. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Might  it  not  be  a  good  idea  for  the  people  interested 
to  initiate  a  proposition  of  that  kind  and  have  it  presented  to  the  Secretary  of 
State? 

Mr.  SWING.  Let  me  observe  that  the  legislature  of  the  State  of  California 
memorialized  Congress  to  purchase  that  land  several  years  ago,  but  nothing 
has  been  done  and  nothing  can  be  done,  because  the  constitution  of  Mexico 
prohibits  the  alienation  of  any  territory  of  Mexico. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Let  me  ask  you  just  a  couple  of  questions.  You  have  some  in- 
terest in  Imperial  Valley  and  I  suppose  you  have  met  their  chambers  of  com- 
merce and  landowners  and  prospective  landowners.  This  all-American  canal 
is  estimated  to  cost  about  $30,000,000. 


78  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX. 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  It  is  the  view  of  your  people  that  you  are  ready  and  willing  to 
reimburse  the  Government  if  intrusted  construction — to  reimburse  the  Govern- 
ment for  the  money  expended  in  building  this  all-American  canal? 

Mr.  BACON.  That  is  my  understanding. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  With  a  reasonable  rate  of  interest? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  have  not  been  actively  enough  connected  with  affairs  down  in 
the  valley  to  be  sure  about  that. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Who  is  ready  to  present  those  facts  to  the  committee? 

Mr.  BACON.  Mr.  Nickerson  can  give  you  all  those  facts.  I  do  not  want  to 
duplicate  what  he  will  say.  He  is  president  of  the  Imperial  irrigation  district 
and  is  thoroughly  conversant  with  the  valley.  He  is  one  of  the  pioneers  of  the 
valley  and  understands  absolutely  the  entire  problem  from  start  to  finish. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  Mr.  Bacon,  would  the  city  of  San  Diego  be  directly  interested 
in  this  power  development  as  a  prospective  purchaser  of  a  portion  of  the  power? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  think  not  only  the  city  of  San  Diego  but  every  city  in  Cali- 
fornia that  could  possibly  come  in  under  this  project  would  be  glad  to  get  all 
the  power  it  can. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  Can  you,  as  mayor,  now  give  us  any  definite  assurance  that  the 
city  of  San  Diego  will  purchase  part  of  the  power  and  pay  a  reasonable  price 
for  it? 

Mr.  BACON.  No;  not  absolute  assurance,  outside  of  a  guess  as  to  what  would 
be  done,  because,  as  you  understand,  it  would  mean  a  bond  issue,  and  until 
the  bond  issue  was  carried  you  are  not  sure  of  anything.  But  I  will  say  we 
are  as  sure  of  that  as  we  are  of  anything  that  is  to  take  place  in  the  future 
in  connection  with  the  municipality. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  But  it  is  your  opinion  that  they  will  take  a  certain  amount 
of  that  power  and  will  be  willing  to  pay  a  reasonable  price  for  it? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  That  is  a  question,  of  course,  that  we  will  have  to  meet,  as  to 
what  will  become  of  this  power  and  whether  there  will  be  really  a  market  for 
it  sufficient  to  enable  the  Government  to  reimburse  itself  for  this  cost  of  con- 
struction. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Does  the  city  of  San  Diego  own  its  own  power  plant 
now.  or  does  it  purchase  from  private  concerns? 

Mr.  BACON.  We  own  our  water  plant.  We  have  our  own  water  system,  but 
we  do  not  own  a  power  plant.  But  I  think  when  it  came  to  the  qxiestion  of 
the  distribution  of  power  the  difficulty  would  not  be  to  dispose  of  the  power; 
the  difficulty  would  be  in  allocating  the  power  among  the  people  who  will 
want  it. 

There  is  just  one  other  thing  I  would  like  to  submit  in  connection  with  this. 
Just  as  I  was  leaving  my  office  to  come  East,  the  May  1  issue  of  the  Journal 
of  Electricity  and  Western  Industry  was  dropped  on  my  desk,  and  in  it  I 
find  an  article  by  Mr.  C.  E.  Grunsky,  who  was  one  of  the  engineers  that  had 
to  do  with  the  building  of  the  Panama  Canal,  containing  an  airplane  photograph 
of  this  district,  which  probably  will  show  more  graphically  than  anything  else 
just  what  those  conditions  are.  This  photograph  carries  this  caption :  "  The 
major  argument  for  immediate  action  on  the  Colorado."  This  shows  the  sec- 
tion immediately  south  and  east  of  the  Volcano  Lake  Levee  and  will  fit  on  the 
map  just  about  like  that  [indicating],  with  the  upper  left-hand  corner  of  the 
picture  fitting  against  the  Volcano  Lake  Levee.  That  shows  how  the  river 
comes  down  there  and  breaks  out  when  it  hits  this  heavily  underbrushed  sec- 
tion down  here  [indicating],  and  then  after  spreading  out  and  dropping  its 
silt,  it  comes  back  and  gathers  into  more  or  less  of  a  stream  and  goes  down 
into  the  ocean.  This  whole  section  here  is  just  building  up  [indicating].  It 
is  interesting  as  showing  about  how  that  river  looks ;  it  looks  like  a  great 
big  devilfish  reaching  out  for  something,  and  I  think  that  just  about  describes 
the  condition  of  the  river,  it  is  a  great  big  devilfish  reaching  out  over  into 
the  valley  and  trying  every  way  to  get  there. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Could  that  be  reproduced  for  the  record.  I  wonder? 

Mr.  BACON.  If  you  see  fit. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  Those  resolutions  that  you  said  you  had,  do  you  want  to  intro- 
duce those  in  the  record? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  should  like  to ;  yes.    I  have  the  original  copies  here. 

Mr.  RAKER.  For  40  or  50  years  before  there  was  any  development  of  the 
Imperial  Valley,  and  when  the  railroad  was  built  down  through  the  Imperial 
Valley  on  the  west  side,  where  the  Salton  Sea  is  now,  there  was  no  water  run- 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  79 

ning  in  there  and  no  one  was  making  any  pretense  of  keeping  the  water  out. 
What  brought  about  the  change? 

Mr.  BACON.  Simply  this:  There  was  a  pretty  well  denned  delta  built  up 
there  with  the  river  running  along  this  eastern  edge.  Now  the  silt  kept  coming 
down.  There  is  a  high  line  of  hills  here,  a  mesa  [indicating].  That  silt  gradu- 
ally tilled  up  this  marshy  land  at  the  mouth  of  the  river,  and  the  river  gradually 
came  back  here.  Each  year  that  added  quantity  of  silt  filled  that  up  until  the 
delta  was  raised  to  such  a  point  that  the  river  started  breaking  off  in  this  direc- 
tion toward  the  valley.  Now  this  was  down  in  Mexico.  If  you  have  ever 
been  over  in  that  country  you  know  you  know  it  dosn't  look  as  though  there 
ever  could  have  been  a  drop  of  water  in  it.  Naturally  there  was  no  apprehen- 
sion felt  at  all  by  the  railroad  people  when  they  built  that  railroad,  but  within 
the  last  few  years  there  has  been  great  apprehension.  The  change  has  been 
taking  place  so  gradually  that  nobody  noticed  it.  but  now  it  is  getting  up  to 
the  danger  point.  Probably  in  prehistoric  times  it  was  100  feet  deep  there, 
but  the  silt  gradually  filled  up  this  whole  delta.  You  have  exactly  the  same 
situation  on  the  Delta  of  the  Nile  and  the  Delta  of  the  Mississippi.  It  forms 
a  cone  pretty  well  defined  by  these  little  branches  of  the  river  [indicating], 
and  then  it  breaks  on  one  side  or  the  other  of  the  cone  and  keeps  breaking,  and 
each  year  the  silt  adds  that  much  more  mud  to  the  river  bed  and  it  breaks 
again,  and  now  it  is  attempting  to  break  each  time  over  toward  the  valley,  be- 
cause all  this  land  here  has  been  filled  up  [indicating]. 

'  Mr.  RAKER.  Then,  none  of  the  works  that  have  been  put  in  the  river  in  an 
attempt  to  divert  the  water  have  had  any  effect  relative  to  this  water  breaking 
over  west  and  north?  It  just  comes  naturally? 

Mr.  BACON.  It  just  comes  naturally.  The  works  tend  to  keep  it  east — try  to 
force  it  east — but  the  constant  tendency  of  the  river  is  to  break  over  west. 
Every  time  it  has  broken  it  pushes  its  way  farther  toward  the  valley,  until — if 
that  river  had  been  left  alone  in  1908  it  would  to-day  be  flowing  right  down 
tlirouu'h  here,  down  through  the  valley  here  [indicating].  There  would  be  the 
course  of  the  river  and  it  would  continue  to  flow  there  until  this  entire  area  was 
scoured  out. 

Mr.  HAKKK.  Let  me  ask  you  this  question.  In  the  protection  of  the  Imperial 
Valley,  would  we  be  doing  this  for  American  citizens? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  it  would  be  the  greatest  calamity  of  modern 
times  for  that  river  to  break  into  that  valley. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  I  hope  you  got  my  question.  I  am  asking  you  now  if  this  develop- 
ment would  be  entirely  for  the  benefit  of  American  citizens? 

Mr.   P>A«>.\.  Entirely? 

Mr.  RAKER.  Yes. 

Mr.  BACON.  No ;  Mexico  is  bound  to  reap  a  little  benefit  from  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Well,  then,  in  California  and  in  Imperial  Valley,  we  would  be 
doing  this  improvement  and  protecting  the  homes  and  farms  of  the  American 
citizens? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir ;  absolutely. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Has  any  estimate  been  made  of  the  length  of  time  that 
it  would  take  the  Salton  Sea  basin  to  fill  up  if  the  entire  river  were  deflected 
into  it? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir;  I  have  had  an  estimate  made  of  that  kind  and  checked 
it  myself  before  I  came  out  here.  It  would  require  approximately  15  years 
to  fill  up  completely,  and  it  would  require  approximately,  if  it  filled  up,  prob- 
ably five  or  six  years  more  to  silt  up  here  so  that  you  would  commence  to  get 
an  evaporation  process  again.  It  would  probably  take  7.r>  or  100  years  to 
evaporate. 

It  will  continue  to  run  into  here  until  this  is  silled  up  again.  You  will 
have  duplicated  the  process  you  had  several  hundred  years  ago  and  then  it 
will  break  over  on  this  side  again,  and  it  will  just  keep  alternating  back  and 
forth  through  periods  of  300  or  400  years. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  am  always  in  favor  of  protecting  any  of  our  people.  Is  there 
anything  in  the  statement  that  has  been  going  around  that  Imperial  Valley  is 
practically  being  colonized  by  Japanese  and  .Mexicans? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  do  not  think  there  is  a  thing  in  it.  Now.  here  is  probably 
what  that  statement  is  founded  on :  This  section  in  here 

Mr.  LITTLE  (interposing).  In  Mexico? 

Mr.  BACON.  In  Mexico.  This  section  in  here  in  Mexico  [indicating]  is 
being  worked  by  foreign  labor  entirely  and  there  is  where  the  danger  to  the 
American  farmer  comes  from. 


80  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Where  is  most  of  that  land  owned?    Who  owns  it? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  understand  that  a  good  share  of  that  land  is  owned  by  a 
Los  Angeles  man,  Mr.  Harry  Chandler. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Owned  by  capitalists? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  And  they  have  the  work  done  by  Japanese  largely? 

Mr.  BACON.  That  is  what  I  understand,  by  Japanese  and  Mexicans. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Is  it  or  is  it  not  a  fact  that  in  the  last  two  or  three  years  the 
Imperial  Valley  people  have  rented  out  their  lands  and  have  practically  Japan- 
esed  that  entire  valley? 

Mr.  BACON.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  SWING.  There  has  been  a  law  against  it,  Judge  Raker.    You  know  that. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  was  asking  about  the  facts,  irrespective  of  the  law. 

Mr.  SWING.  We  are  law-abiding  citizens  down  there. 

Mr.  BACON.  There  is  a  colonization  scheme  starting  in  here  [indicating]  for 
«'.\-stTvice  men,  and  I  believe  the  only  successful  one  in  this  country.  Some 
of  those  men  went  in  there  and  started  from  nothing  and  paid  for  the  land  in 
the  last  two  or  three  years. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Went  in  where? 

Mr.  BACON.  Right  here,  up  near  Brawley. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  That  is  the  northern  end  of  the  Imperial  Valley  ? 

Mr.  BACON.  That  is  about  the  center.  There  were  some  150  men  in  there  at 
one  time.  I  believe  that  there  are  50  there  now.  That  is  a  pretty  good  average, 
I  think,  to  make. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Now,  you  have  been  in  Imperial  Valley,  and  you  think  I  am  safe 
in  saying  that  the  farmers  there,  during  the  last  three  years  have  not  been  and 
are  not  continuing  there  to  practically  leave  the  land  and  rent  it  to  the  Japanese? 

Mr.  BACON.  Oh,  no.  But  here  is  where  the  farmers  are  awfully  handicapped : 
No  bank  is  lending  money  on  land  there  on  account  of  this  flood  menace.  The 
Federal  farm  loan  bank  has  refused  to  make,  loans.  They  say  that  this  danger 
is  so  great  that  they  do  not  consider  they  are  justified  in  making  loans  on  that 
property. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So  that  handicaps  you? 

Mr.  BACON.  Very  much.     They  are  working  under  an  awful  handicap. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Are  we  to  understand  that  by  reason  of  this  menace  of  the  inflow 
of  the  Colorado  River  the  farm  loan  banks  decline  to  loan  money  to  these  farm- 
ers in  the  valley? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  How  long  has  that  been  the  case? 

Mr.  BACON.  That  was  brought  out  at  the  hearing  held  before  this  committee 
about  two  years  ago. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  It  was  brought  out  then,  but  how  long  has  it  been  the  case? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  know  it  has  been  the  case  for  two  years ;  how  much  longer  I 
do  not  know. 

Mr.  RAKEB.  That  would  practically  apply  to  private  individuals  loaning  on 
ranches,  too.  would  it  not? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes ;  of  course,  when  a  bank  refuses  to  loan,  the  private  individual 
with  little  capital  does  not  consider  he  is  safe  in  loaning. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So  you  are  handicapped  in  getting  money  enough  to  keep  im- 
provements going,  and  you  are  handicapped  with  this  danger  always  before  you 
that  this  might  destroy  all  you  have? 

Mr.  BACON.  Yes,  sir ;  they  are  handicapped  decidedly.  Here  is  another  pe- 
culiar phase  of  the  situation :  You  have  down  here  in  Mexico  land  colonized 
by  Japanese 

Mr.  RAKER  (interposing).  Where? 

Mr.  BACON.  Below  the  line  in  Mexico.  You  have  this  area  in  here  in  Cali- 
fornia [indicating]  populated  by  the  American  farmer. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  is  in  California? 

Mr.  BACON.  In  California.  Now  the  California  American  citizens  are  being 
assessed  to-day  about  half  a  million  dollars  a  year  through  their  irrigation 
project.  This  money  is  sent  down  into  Mexico  and  spent  on  levees  which  protect 
this  Mexican  land  that  is  raising  produce  to  compete  with  the  American  farmer 
on  the  American  side  of  the  line.  You  are  penalizing  the  American  farmer  about 
$500,000  a  year,  which  helps  out  this  man  in  Mexico. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Then  in  addition  to  that,  on  the  Mexican  side  just  below  Mexicali, 
you  maintain  a  Monte  Carlo  to  take  the  rest  of  his  money. 

Mr.  BACON.  I  would  not  say  that  was  maintained  for  the  American  farmer. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWEE  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN.  81 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  did  not  say  the  American  farmer;  I  said  there  is  maintained. 

Mr.  BACON.  There  is,  I  believe.     I  am  not  advised  on  that. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  I  did  not  make  such  an  assertation  as  to  the  American  farmer. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  I  understood  your  question  to  Mayor  Bacon  to  be  that  "  you 
maintained  "? 

Mr.  RAKER.  Did  I  say  "you"?     I  should  have  said  "There  is  maintained." 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Where  is  the  produce  that  is  raised  in  Mexican  territory 
marketed  ? 

Mr.  BACON.  In  the  United  States  largely.  I  would  not  be  surprised-  if  some  of 
the  cantaloupes  that  you  have  been  eating  here  in  the  last  week  have  come 
from  Mexican  territory. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Does  the  emergency  tariff  now  in  force  have  any  effect 
upon  that? 

Mr.  BACON.  I  do  not  know.  It  certainly  is  not  prohibitive,  because  I  know  I 
have  seen  great  quantities  of  Mexican  produce  coming  into  American  territory, 
and  they  evidently  can  stand  the  tariff  and  still  sell  their  goods  in  this 
country. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Are  there  any  more  questions  to  ask  of  Mr.  Bacon? 

Mr.  BARBOTTR.  I  was  just  going  to  ask  unanimous  consent,  or  to  suggest,  that 
the  resolutions  that  Mayor  Bacon  has  be  incorporated  in  the  record. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  If  there  is  no  objection,  that  will  be  done. 

(The  papers  referred  to  follow:) 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  June  22,  1922. 
COMMITTEE  ON  IRRIGATION  OF  PUBLIC  LANDS, 

House  of  Representatives. 

GENTLEMEN  :  In  submitting  the  accompanying  resolutions  of  various  munici- 
pal, civic,  and  other  organizations  for  your  information,  it  would  seem  to  be 
appropriate  for  me  as  president  of  the  League  of  Southern  California  Munici- 
palities and  chairman  of  called  conventions  of  this  and  associated  organizations 
to  acquaint  you  with  what  I  believe  to  be  the  unanimous  sentiment  of  the  people 
in  southern  California  regarding  the  present  bill  known  as  H.  R.  11449.  together 
with  a  brief  historical  survey  of  the  public  movements  leading  up  to  such 
conclusions. 

HISTORICAL. 

Immediately  after  the  publication  of  the  Preliminary  Report  on  the  Problems 
of  the  Imperial  Valley  and  Vicinity,  the  Director  of  the  Reclamation  Service, 
as  required  by  act  of  Congress  approved  May  18.  1920.  entitled.  "An  act  to 
provide  for  the  examination  and  report  on  conditions  and  possibilities  of  irri- 
gation development  of  the  Imperial  Valley  in  California."  attention  of  the  people 
of  southern  California  became  riveted  upon  the  possibilities  of  a  practical 
solution  of  the  problem  of  the  flood  peril,  which  threatens  the  complete  and 
permanent  destruction  of  a  large  section  of  this  State. 

The  pressing  necessity  for  additional  electric  power  resources  for  the  use 
of  the  Southwest  by  reason  of  its  industrial,  commercial,  and  agricultural 
growth  immediately  suggested  to  the  people  of  southern  California  a  possibility 
of  practical  financial  cooperation  on  its  part  with  other  public  agencies,  such  as 
a  Federal  Government  and  the  States  of  Arizona  and  Nevada,  in  arriving  at  a 
solution  of  a  problem  otherwise  locally  impossible  and  nationally  difficult  of 
accomplishment. 

Somewhat  spontaneously,  therefore,  a  convention  of  the  cities  and  districts 
of  southern  California  was  held  at  Pasadena,  Calif.,  on  July  22,  1921.  This 
first  meeting  effected  a  permanent  organization,  known  as  the  League  of 
Southern  California  Municipalities.  Members  in  attendance,  representatives 
of  all  of  the  larger  and  most  of  the  smaller  communities,  thereupon  adopted 
resolutions  urging  action  by  Congress  and  the  Federal  Power  Commission  which 
would  exclude  private  interests  in  the  development  of  Boulder  Canyon  project 
and  permit  its  immediate  construction  and  control  by  the  Federal  Government. 

Other  conventions  were  subsequently  held,  namely,  at  Ontario,  Alhambra. 
and  Santa  Ana,  and  delegations  presented  the  collective  sentiment  of  the  people 
of  southern  California  to  the  convention  of  the  League  of  the  Southwest  at 
Riverside  and  the  official  hearing  called  at  San  Diego  by  the  honorable  Secre- 
tary of  the  Interior.  A.  B.  Fall.  December  last. 

Official  representatives  were  present  at  Phoenix,  Ariz.,  in  March  on  the  oc- 
casion of  the  hearing  of  the  Colorado  River  Commission,  Secretary  of  Com- 
merce, Hon.  Herbert  Hoover  presiding. 


82  DEVELOPMENT   OF  LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX. 

On  no  occasion  has  there  been  anything  hut  a  unanimous  and  insistent  demand 
for  the  principles  expressed  in  H.  K.  11449,  bill  now  before  the  Committee  on 
Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands. 

H.  K.  11449  INDORSED. 

After  the  introduction  of  the  bill  providing  for  the  protection  and  develop- 
ment of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin  (H.  R.  11449)  a  meeting  of  the  League 
of  Southern  California  Municipalities,  in  conjunction  with  irrigation  and  farm 
districts,  was  called  by  its  president,  John  L.  Bacon,  mayor  of  Santa  Diego,  to 
consider  the  measure.  At  this  meeting  held  at  Santa  Ana.  Calif.,  on  May  4, 
1922,  the  aforesaid  bill  was  carefully  considered  and  unanimously  indorsed  by 
resolution  attached  hereto.  A  committee  was  appointed  to  take  proper  steps 
to  apprise  Congress  of  the  sentiment  in  southern  California  in  way  of  its 
speedy  passage. 

Subsequently  a  large  number  of  cities,  districts,  and  other  bodies  indorsed 
this  or  passed  appropriate  resolutions,  a  number  of  which  are  likewise  attached. 

STATEMENT  OF  LEAGUE  OF   SOUTHERN    CALIFORNIA    MUNICIPALITIES. 

Southern  California,  as  represented  by  this  organization,  now  desires  to  make 
the  following  statement  of  its  position  and  understanding  of  H.  R.  11449, 
authorizing  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  project. 

We  understand  that  it  is  proposed  that  the  Federal  Government  construct  a 
dam  on  the  lower  reaches  of  the  Colorado  River,  in  Boulder  Canyon,  and 
develop,  regulate,  and  control  the  flow  of  the  river  and  prevent  disastrous  flood 
conditions  as  a  part  of  the  project. 

It  is  proposed  to  construct  certain  irrigation  canals  which  will  permit  of 
the  irrigation  of  large  tracts  of  arid  land  as  an  incident  to  the  construction  of 
the  dam.  There  will  be  created  power  rights.  The  cost  of  the  dam  project 
will  be  charged  against  these  power  rights  which  are  to  be  fairly  allocated  to 
the  States  and  districts. 

The  cost  of  irrigation  canals  and  works  is  to  be  charged  against  the  land 
to  be  brought  under  irrigation. 

COLORADO   RIVER   LONG   A   PROBLEM. 

The  Colorado  River,  with  its  tremendous  watershed,  has  long  been  a  terri- 
fying agent  of  destruction.  The  melting  snow  from  the  mountains  through 
which  it  runs  creates  flood  conditions  of  unmanageable  proportions.  At  the 
same  time  its  great  flow  of  water  and  its  rapid  fall  makes  it  a  great  poten- 
tiality for  irrigation  and  power  development. 

Being  an  interstate  and  international  stream,  no  State  and  no  private  in- 
terest can  be  in  a  position  either  to  control  its  floods  or  utilize  its  power  and 
irrigation. 

It  presents,  therefore,  a  national  problem  solvable  only  by  Federal  initiative. 

WHY    SOLUTION     IS    NOW    POSSIBLE. 

Two  circumstances  have  brought  the  matter  of  control  and  usage  of  the 
Colorado  River  to  the  front  for  action,  and  likewise  permits  a  practical  so- 
lution. 

The  gradual  deposit  of  silt  along  the  lower  reaches  of  the  river  continuing 
through  years  has  served  to  increase  the  flood  menace.  If,  while  in  flood,  the 
river  breaks  its  banks,  the  entire  Imperial  Valley,  which  is  below  sea  level, 
will  be  flooded  and  destroyed.  When  the  waters  once  find  their  way  into  the 
valley  nothing  but  the  evaporation  by  the  heat  of  the  sun  through  centuries 
of  time  can  remove  the  water.  While  the  Imperial  Valley  and  various  interests 
there  have  done  everything  in  their  power  against  floods,  such  measures  are 
only  temporary  and  may  fail  and  result  in  disaster  to  Imperial  Valley  any 
year.  The  only  thing  we  can  do  for  this  territory  is  the  control  of  the  flow  of 
the  river  by  storage,  and  this  is  possible  only  by  Federal  action. 

While  this  Hood  peril  has  been  thus  growing  more  acute,  the  Southwest  has 
been  rapidly  increasing  in  population  and  its  resources — commercial,  industrial, 
and  agricultural.  The  demand  for  power  exceeds  the  available  supply.  Thus 
there  has  been  created  a  market  for  the  power  which  will  be  produced  by  a 
dam  at  Boulder  Canyon,  so  that  the  financing  of  the  project  can  be  made- 
feasible. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  83 

In  brief,  the  Imperial  Valley  needs  protection  from  floods.  The  territory 
around  the  lower  reaches  of  the  Colorado  River  needs  the  power  which  will 
be  created  by  the  agencies  which  protect  the  valley  from  flood. 

Furthermore,  as  an  incident  to  the  protection  of  the  Imperial  Valley  from 
Hood,  water  will  be  available  for  irrigation,  and  it  will  be  possible  to  open 
thousands  of  acres  of  the  public  domain  which  are  now  arid  and  useless.  H.  R. 
11449  gives  to  the  ex-service  men  preferential  right  to  this  land. 

PLAN  CAREFULLY  WORKED  OUT. 

Southern  California  appreciates  that  the  plan  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  project, 
as  expressed  in  concrete  form  in  the  bill  now  before  Congress,  has  been 
worked  out  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  and  the  Reclamation  Service  after 
extensive  investigation  and  as  a  result  of  many  years  and  long  discussions ; 
that  it  is  a  carefully  balanced  scheme ;  that  its  consummation  will  not  affect 
the  rights  or  claims  of  those  interested  in  the  upper  reaches  of  the  river ;  that  the 
project  will,  within  a  reasonable  time,  finance  itself;  that  the  plan  recognizes 
in  a  fair  and  reasonable  way  the  powerful  sentiment  in  the  Nation  against  per- 
mitting this,  perhaps  the  Nation's  greatest  resource  in  hydroelectric  power,  to 
pass  into  private  hands ;  that  public  agencies  are  given  a  preferential  right  to 
the  power  to  be  developed ;  and  that  any  power  passing  into  private  hands  is 
subject  to  recapture  within  a  reasonable  time,  the  latter  two  provisions  being 
an  established  national  policy  written  into  the  Federal  water  power  act. 

STRONG  SUPPORT  TO  PROJECT. 

Southern  California  believes  that  so  carefully  has  the  honorable  Secretary  of 
the  Interior  and  the  Reclamation  Service  worked  out  its  plan  for  this  project, 
and  so  accurately  has  the  public  sentiment  been  gauged,  that  there  is  a  feeling 
that  the  plan  is  sound  in  all  its  fundamental  features.  City  after  city  in  the 
Southwest  as  well  as  large  agricultural  organizations  have  indorsed  it.  Cham- 
bers of  commerce  and  other  civic  bodies  have  expressed  their  approval.  At  least, 
as  far  as  southern  California  is  concerned,  sentiment  is  unanimous. 
Respectfully  submitted. 

JOHN  L.  BACON, 
Mayor  San  Diego,  Calif., 
President  League  Southern  California  Municipalities. 


RESOLUTION  No.  27690. 

Be  it  resolved.  By  the  common  council  of  the  city  of  San  Diego,  Calif.,  as 
follows :  That  the  following  resolution  adopted  at  Santa  Ana,  Calif.,  May  4, 
1922,  at  a  called  convention  of  representatives  of  the  southern  section  of  the 
League  of  California  Municipalities,  of  the  farm  bureaus  and  farm  centers  of 
southern  California  and  of  the  Imperial  irrigation  districts,  be,  and  the  same 
is  hereby,  adopted  as  an  expression  of  opinion  of  the  common  council  of  said 
city : 

"  Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the 
gr^it  Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being 
overflowed  and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River;  that  the  menace  of  this  river 
is  increasing  with  the  years;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a 
year ;  that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke 
into  the  valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea  ;  that  its  levees 
must  be  built  higher  each  year ;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construc- 
tion is  very  poor  material  for  the  purpose ;  that  should  the  Colorado  River 
break  through  the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immeasurable ;  and 
that  the  havoc  of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling,  because  it  would  not 
only  be  immediately  destructive  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent  for 
the  reason  that  its  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside,  as  in  floods  most 
everywhere  else,  but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below 
sea  level,  as  in  the  formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river 
again  turns  to  another  outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts 
these  waters  by  evaporation  ;  and 

"  Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe  and  the  50,000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars'  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 


84  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

valley  can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river 
basin,  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irrigated 
and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed;  and 

"  Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  '  To  provide  for  the  pro- 
tection and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,'  introduced  in 
the  House-  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate 
by  Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplish- 
ment of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner :  Now,  therefore, 
be  it 

"Resolved,  By  the  joint  convention  of  the  representatives  of  the  southern  sec- 
tion of  the  League  of  California  Municipalities,  of  the  farm  bureaus  and  farm 
centers  of  southern  California  and  of  the  Imperial  irrigation  districts,  duly 
assembled  in  the  city  of  Santa  Ana,  Calif.,  on  Thursday,  the  4th  day  of  May, 
1922,  pursuant  to  call  and  notice  regularly  made  and  given,  that  House  of 
Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  '  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  development 
of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,'  be  approved  and  indorsed ;  that  we  urge 
upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the  Congress  the 
imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this  bill,  that  the  relief 
therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given ;  that  we  request  the  Senators  and  Con- 
gressmen from  California  to  give  their  special  attention  to  this  measure  and 
press  its  adoption." 

And  be  it  further  resolved,  That  this  common  council  urges  that  all  possible 
means  be  taken  to  expedite  the  passage  of  the  bill  mentioned  in  the  above 
resolution ;  and 

Be  it  further  resolved,  That  a  copy  of  this  resolution  be  forwarded  by  the 
city  clerk  to  each  of  the  Representatives  and  Senators  from  the  State  of 
California. 

I  hereby  certify  that  the  above  and  foregoing  is  a  full,  true,  and  correct 
copy  of  resolution  No.  27690  of  the  common  council  of  the  city  of  San  Diego, 
as  adopted  by  said  council  May  15,  1922. 

[SEAL.]  ALLEN  H.  WRIGHT, 

City  Clerk  of  the  City  of  San  Diego,  Calif. 


Los  ANGELES,  CALIF.,  June  7,  1922. 
R.  L.  CBISWKLL. 

Hotel  Raleigh.  Washington,  D.  C.: 

At  a  meeting  of  the  city  council  held  this  day  the  following  resolution  was 
adopted : 

"  Be  it  resolved,  That  the  council  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  strongly  urges 
the  passage  of  the  companion  bills  pending  in  Congress,  being  Senate  bill  3511 
and  House  bill  11449,  providing  for  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon 
project  on  the  Colorado  River  and  of  the  all-American  canal,  connecting  Im- 
perial and  Coachella  Valleys  with  Laguna  Dam ;  that  the  council  regards  these 
great  projects  as  of  vital  importance  to  the  welfare  and  development  of  the 
whole  Southwest,  and  requests  the  Senators  and  Representatives  from  Califor- 
nia in  the  National  Congress  to  employ  their  utmost  efforts  to  bring  about  the 
adoption  of  such  legislation ;  that  certified  copies  of  this  resolution  be  trans- 
mitted to  Secretary  Fall  and  Secretary  Hoover  and  to  our  Senators  and  Mem- 
bers of  Congress." 

ROBERT  DOMINGXJEZ,  City  Clerk. 


RESOLUTION. 

Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the 
great  Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being 
overflowed  and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River ;  that  the  menace  of  this  river  is 
increasing  with  the  years;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a  year; 
that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke  into  the 
valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea;  that  its  levees  must  be 
built  higher  each  year;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is 
very  poor  material  for  the  purpose;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break 
through  the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immeasurable:  and  that  the 
havoc  of  its  deluge  would  be  grent  and  appalling  because  it  would  not  only  be 
immediately  destructive,  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent  for  the  reason 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  85 

that  its;  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside,  as  in  floods  most  everywhere  else, 
but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as  in  the 
formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to  another 
outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  waters  by  evapora- 
tion ;  and, 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe,  and  the 
50,000  people  and  the  millions  of  dollars  worth  of  land  and  other  property 
in  th's  valley  can  be  nvade  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the 
river  basin,  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be 
irrigated,  and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed;  and, 

Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  pro- 
tection and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin."  introduced  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate  by 
Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplishment 
of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner:  Now.  therefore,  be  it 

Resolved.  By  the  joint  convention  of  the  representatives  of  the  southern 
section  of  the  League  of  California  Municipalities,  of  the  farm  bureaus  and 
farm  centers  of  southern  California,  and  of  the  Imperial  irrigation  districts, 
duly  assembled  in  the  city  of  Santa  Ana,  Calif.,  on  Thursday,  the  4th  day  of 
May,  1922,  pursuant  to  call  and  notice  regularly  made  and  given.  That  House  of 
Representatives  bill  No.  11449.  "  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  development 
of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  be  approved  and  indorsed ;  that  we  urge 
upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the  Congress  the 
imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this  bill  that  the  relief 
therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given ;  that  we  request  the  Senators  and  Con- 
gressmen from  California  to  give  their  special  attention  to  this  measure  and 
press  its  adoption. 

Respectfully  sumbitted. 

GEORGE  L.  HOODENPYL, 
J.  S.  NICKERSON, 
GBANT  M.  LORRAINE, 

Committee. 

I.  Grant  M.  Lorraine,  secretary  of  the  joint  convention  of  the  representatives 
of  the  southern  section  of  the  League  of  California  Municipalities,  of  the  farm 
bureaus  and  farm  centers  of  southern  California,  and  of  the  Imperial  irrigation 
d  stricts.  do  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  resolution  was  unanimously 
adopted  by  said  joint  convention  on  the  4th  day  of  May,  1922,  in  Santa  Ana, 
Calif.,  as  appears  in  the  minutes  of  said  meeting. 
Dated,  Alhambra,  Calif.,  May  20,  1922. 

GRANT  M.  LORRAINK. 

Secretary. 

RESOLUTION. 

Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the  great 
Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being  over- 
flowed and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River ;  that  the  menace  of  this  river  is  in- 
creasing with  the  years;  that  its  bed  is  tilling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a  year; 
that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke  into  the 
valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea;  that  its  levees  must  be 
built  higher  each  year;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is 
very  poor  material  for  the  purpose;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break 
through  the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immeasureable:  and  that  the 
havoc  of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling  because  it  would  not  only  be 
immediately  destructive,  but  its  evil  effects  would  lie  permanent  for  the  reason 
that  its  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside.  as  in  flood  most  everywhere  else, 
but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as  in  the 
formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  r;ver  again  turns  to  another 
outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  waters  by  evapora- 
tion ;  and 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe,  and  the  50,000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 
valley  can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river 
basin  ;  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irrigated, 
and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed  ;  and 


86  DEVELOPMENT   OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

Wliereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  1149,  "  To  provide  for  the  protec- 
tion and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  basin,'1  introduced  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate  by 
Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplishment 
of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner;  now,  therefore,  be  it 

Resolved,  By  the  joint  convention  of  the  representatives  of  the  southern 
section  of  the  League  of  California  Municipalities,  of  the  farm  bureaus  and 
farm  centers  of  the  southern  California  and  of  the  Imperial  irrigation  districts, 
duly  assembled,  in  the  city  of  Santa  Ana,  Calif.,  on  Thursday,  the  4th  day  of 
May,  1922,  pursuant  to  call  and  notice  regularly  made  and  given;  that  House 
of  Representatives  bill  No.  1149,  "  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  develop- 
ment of  the  lower  Colorado  River  basin,"  be  approved  and  indorsed ;  that  we 
urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the'Congress 
the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this  bill  that  the 
relief  proposed  may  soon  be  given ;  that  we  request  the  Senators  and  Congress- 
men from  California  to  give  their  special  attention  to  this  measure  and  press 
its  adoption. 

I,  Otto  H.  Duelke,  city  clerk  of  the  city  of  Inglewood,  Calif.,  do  hereliy  certify 
that  the  foregoing  resolution  was  unanimously  adopted  by  the  board  of  trustees 
of  the  city  of  Inglewood.  Calif.,  on  the  22d  day  of  May,  1922,  as  appears  in  the 
minutes  of  said  meeting. 

In  witness  whereof  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand  and  the  seal  of  the  city  of 
Inglewood,  Calif.,  this  24th  day  of  May,  1922. 

[SEAL.]  OTTO  H.  DUELKE. 

City  Clerk. 

RESOLUTION  ADOPTED  BY  THE  BOARD  OF  TRUSTEES  OF  THE  CITY  OF  ORANGE,  CALIF., 

MAY  19,  1922. 

Whereas  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the  great  Imperial 
Valley  in  California  is  anually  in  imminent  danger  of  being  overflowed  and 
flooded  by  the  Colorado  River;  that  the  menace  of  this  river  is  increasing  with 
the  years ;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  each  year ;  that  its  bottom  is  now 
several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke  into  the  valley  several  years  ago 
and  formed  the  Salton  Sea ;  that  its  levees  must  be  built  higher  each  year ;  that 
the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is  very  poor  material  for  that 
purpose ;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break  through  the  levees  again  its 
destruction  would  be  immeasurable ;  and  that  the  havoc  of  its  deluge  would 
be  great  and  appalling,  because  it  would  not  only  be  immediately  destructive 
but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent,  for  the  reason  that  its  waters  would 
not  run  off  or  subside,  as  in  floods  most  everywhere  else,  but  would  gather  in  the 
basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as  in  the  formation  of  the  Salton 
Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to  another  outlet  and  until  the 
sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  waters  by  evaporation ;  and 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe  and  the  50,000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars'  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 
valley  can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river 
basin,  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irrigated 
and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed ;  and 

Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  protec- 
tion and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin."  introduced  in  the 
Senate  by  Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson  and  in  the  House  of  Representatives  by 
Congressman  Phil  D.  Swing,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplishment 
of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner :  Now.  therefore,  be  it 

Resolved,  by  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  Orange,  assembled  this  19th 
day  of  May  in  regular  adjourned  session  in  the  city  of  Orange,  Calif.,  that 
the  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  protection 
and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  basin."  be  approved  and  in- 
dorsed :  that  we  urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and 
upon  the  Congress  the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of 
this  bill,  that  the  relief  therein  imposed  may  soon  be  given ;  that  we  request  the 
Senators  and  Congressmen  from  California  to  give  their  special  attention  to 
this  measure  and  press  its  adoption. 

Introduced  and  adopted  by  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  Orange,  May 
19,  1922. 

O.   E.    GUNTHER. 

Pre»ident  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  the  City  of  Orange. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF  LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  EASIEST.  87 

I  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  resolution  was  duly  and  regularly  intro- 
duced and  passed  by  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  Orange  at  a  regular 
adjourned  meeting  of  .said  board,  held  on  the  19th  day  of  May,  1922,  by  the 
following  vote :  Ayes.  Trustees  Ainsworth,  Walton,  Heniphill,  Whit  sell,  and 
President  Gunther :  noes,  trustees,  jione ;  absent,  none. 

W.  O.  WHITE,  City  Clerk. 

RESOLUTION  ADOPTED  BY  THE  BOAKD  OF  TIJVSTEES  OF  THE  CITY  OF  UPLAND,  CALIF., 
AT  A  SPECIAL  CALLED  MEETING,  MAY  19.  1922. 

Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the  great 
Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being  over- 
flowed and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River;  that  the  menace  of  this  river  is 
increasing  with  the  years;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a  year; 
that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  wns  when  it  broke  into  the 
valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea ;  that  its  levees  must  be 
l>uilt  higher  each  year;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is 
\(>ry  pror  material  for  the  purpose;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break 
through  the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immeasurable  and  that  the 
havoc  of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling  because  it  would  not  only 
be  immediately  destructive  but  its  evil  effect  would  be  permanent  for  the  reason 
that  its  waters  would  not  run  off  cr  subside,  as  in  floods  most  everywhere  else, 
but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as  in 
the  formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to  an- 
other outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  waters  by 
evaporation ;  and 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe,  and  the  50.000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 
valley  can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flcod-control  dams  in  the  river 
basin  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irrigated 
and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed  ;  and 

Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  pro- 
tection and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  introduced  in 
the  House  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate 
by  Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplish- 
ment of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner :  Now,  there- 
fore, be  it 

Resolved,  By  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  Upland,  at  a  special  meeting 
held  in  the  council  chamber  of  the  city  of  Upland,  on  Friday  the  19th  day  of 
May,  1922,  at  7.30  p.  m.,  pursuant  to  call  and  notice  regularly  made  and  given, 
that  the  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449  "  To  provide  for  the  protection 
and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin."  be  approved  and  indorsed. 

That  we  urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Land  and  upon 
the  Congress  the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this 
bill  that  the  relief  therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given. 

That  we  request  the  Senators  and  Congressmen  from  California  to  give 
their  special  attention  to  this  measure  and  press  its  adoption. 

Approved. 

F.  C.  BUFFINGTON, 

President  of  the  Board  of  Trustees,  City  of  Upland. 
Attest : 

E.  C.  MEHL,  City  Clerk. 

I,  E.  C.  Mehl,  city  clerk  of  the  city  of  Upland,  do  hereby  certify  that  the  fore- 
going resolution  was  unanimously  adopted  by  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  city 
of  Upland,  at  a  special  called  meeting  held  on  the  19th  day  of  May,  1922,  as 
appears  in  the  minutes  of  said  meeting. 

E.  C.  MEHL,  City  Clerk. 

May  20,  1922. 


RESOLUTION  No.  1262. 

Resolved,  By  the  mayor  and  common  council  of  the  city  of  San  Bernardino, 
Calif.,  in  regular  session  duly  assembled  on  the  22d  day  of  May,  1922,  that  we 
unqualifiedly  indorse  House  Bill  No.  1149.  now  pending  in  Congress,  providing 
for  the  protection  and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,  and 
urge  that  Congress  pass  said  measure  at  as  early  a  date  as  possible  in  order 

131&— 22— PT  3 2 


88  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

that  steps  may  be  taken  to  protect  the  vast  property  interests  endangered  by 
the  Colorado  River ;  and 

Be  it  further  resolved,  That  a  certified  copy  of  this  resolution ' be  sent  to  G. 
M.  Lorraine,  secretary  southern  section  League  of  California  Municipalities, 
and  also  to  Herbert  Hoover,  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  Washington,  D.  C. 

I  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  resolution  was  duly  adopted  by  the  mayor 
and  common  council  of  the  city  of  San  Bernardino  at  its  regular  meeting  thereof 
held  on  the  22d  day  of  May,  1922,  by  the  following  vote,  to  wit : 

Ayes :  Pittman,  Rogers,  Rouse,  Stromee,  Adkins. 

Noes :  None. 

Absent:  None. 

[SEAL.]  J.  A.  OSBORN,  City  Clerk. 

STATE  OF  CALIFORNIA, 

County  of  San  Bernardino,  City  of  San  Bernardino,  ss: 

I,  J.  H.  Osborn,  city  clerk  of  the  city  of  San  Bernardino,  do  hereby  certify 
that  the  foregoing  resolution  is  a  true  and  correct  copy  of  resolution  No.  1262, 
as  appears  on  the  records  in  my  office. 

[SEAL.]  J.  H.  OSBORN, 

City  Clerk  City  of  San  Bernardino. 


RESOLUTION  ADOPTED  BY  THE  BOARD  OF  TRUSTEES  or  THE  CITY  OF  SAN  FERNANDO, 
MAY  22,  1922,  RELATIVE  TO  THE  CONTROL  OF  THE  COLORADO  RIVER. 

Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the 
great  Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being 
overflowed  and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River;  that  the  menace  of  this  river  is 
increasing  with  the  years ;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a  year ; 
that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke  into  the 
valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea ;  that  its  levees  must  be 
built  higher  each  year ;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is  very 
poor  material  for  the  purpose ;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break  through 
the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immeasurable ;  and  that  the  havoc 
of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appaling  because  it  would  not  only  be  im- 
mediately destructive  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent  for  the  reason  that 
its  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside  as  in  floods  most  everywhere  else  but 
would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as  in  the  forma- 
tion of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to  another  outlet 
and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  waters  by  evaporation; 
and 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe,  and  the  50,000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this  valley 
can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river  basin, 
and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irrigated  and  im- 
mense amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed ;  and 

Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  protec- 
tion and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  introduced  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate  by 
Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplishment 
of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner :  Now,  therefore,  be  it 

Resolved,  By  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  San  Fernando,  that  House 
of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  develop- 
ment of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  be  approved  and  indorsed. 

That  we  urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the 
Congress  the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this  bill 
that  the  relief  therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given. 

That  we  request  the  Senators  and  Congressmen  from  California  to  give  their 
special  attention  to  this  measure  and  press  its  adoption. 

Respectfully  submitted. 

F.  D.  PARKER, 
President  Board  of  Trustees  City  of  San  Fernando. 

I,  H.  C.  Caldwell,  city  clerk  of  the  city  of  San  Fernando  do  hereby  certify 
that  the  foregoing  resolution  was  unanimously  adopted  on  the  22d  day  of  May,  £*• 
1922,  by  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  San  Fernando. 

H.  C.  CALDWELL, 

City  Clerk  of  the  City  of  San  Fernando. 
SAN  FERNANDO,  CALIF.,  May  22,  1922. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN.  89 

i 

RESOLUTION  No.  274,  BY  THE  BOARD  or  TRUSTEES  OF  THE  CITY  OF  FULLERTON, 
URGING  THE  PROTECTION  AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVEK 
BASIN. 

The  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  Fullerton  do  resolve  as  follows : 

Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the  great 
Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being  over- 
flowed and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River ;  that  the  menace  of  this  river  is  in- 
creasing with  the  years;  that  its  bed  is  tilling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a  year; 
that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke  into  the 
valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea ;  that  its  levees  must  be  built 
higher  each  year ;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is  very 
poor  material  for  the  purpose ;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break  through 
the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immeasurable  and  that  the  havoc  of 
its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling,  because  it  would  not  only  be  imme- 
diately destructive,  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent,  for  the  reason 
that  its  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside,  as  in  floods  most  everywhere  else, 
but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as  in  the 
formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to  another 
outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  waters  by  evapora- 
tion ;  and 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe,  and  the  50,000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars'  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this  valley 
can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river  basin 
and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irrigated  and 
immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed ;  and 

Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  protection 
and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  introduced  in  the  House 
of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate  by  Senator 
Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplishment  of  these 
purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner :  Now,  therefore,  be  it 

Resolved,  by  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  Fullerton,  Calif.,  that  House 
of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  develop- 
ment of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  be  approved  and  indorsed. 

That  we  urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the 
Congress  the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this  bill, 
that  the  relief  therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given. 

That  we  request  the  Senators  and  Congressmen  from  California  to  give  their 
special  attention  to  this  measure  and  press  its  adoption. 

I  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  resolution  was  duly  and  regularly  intro- 
duced and  adopted  by  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  Fullerton  at  its  regular 
meeting  held  on  the  16th  day  of  May,  1922,  by  the  following  vote : 

Ayes :  Drake,  Marsden,  Davis,  and  Coulter. 

Noes:  None. 

Absent :  Moore. 

Attest :  F.  C.  HEZMALHALCH, 

[SEAL.]  City  Clerk  of  the  City  of  Fullerton. 

The  foregoing  resolution  is  hereby  approved  this  16th  day  of  May,  1922. 

W.  F.  COULTER, 
President  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  the  City  of  Fullerton. 

I,  F.  C.  Hezmalhalch,  city  clerk  of  the  city  of  Fullerton,  do  hereby  certify 
that  the  foregoing  is  a  full,  true,  and  correct  copy  of  the  resolution  introduced 
and  passed  by  the  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  Fulfterton  on  the  16th  day  of 
May.  1022.  and  approved  by  the  chairman  of  the  board  of  trustees  on  the  16th 
day  of  May,  1922,  the  original  of  which  is  on  file  in  my  office. 

in  witness  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand  and  affixed  my  official  seal 
this  22d  day  of  May,  1922. 

[SEAL.]  F.  C.  HEZMALHALCH, 

City  Cleric  of  the  City  of  Fullerton. 

RESOLUTION    No.   13-TKV-N.   S.,   TNHOIJSINI;    HOCSE  OF  REPRKSKNTATIVKS   BILL  No. 

11440.     "To     PROVIDE     KOK    THK    PROTECTION     AM)     I  M  VKI.OI'.M  KNT    OF    THE    LOWER 
('(II  OKADO    KlVKK." 

W]*>rcas  it  is  apparent  <"<>  a11  persons  acquainted  with  th<-  facts  that  the  great 
Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being  over- 
flowed and  tlooded  by  the  Colorado  River;  that  the  menace'  of  this  river  is 


90  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLOKADO  RIVER  BASIN. 

increasing  with  the  years;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a  year; 
that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  \vas  when  it  broke  into  the 
valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea:  that  its  levees  must  be 
built  higher  each  year ;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is 
very  poor  material  for  the  purpose;  that  should  the  r<il<>rado  River  break 
through  the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  imineasureable  and  that  the 
havoc  of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling,  because  it  would  not  only 
be  immediately  destructive  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent  for  the 
reason  that  its  waters  wou'.d  not  run  off  or  subside,  as  in  Hoods  most  everywhere 
else,  but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as 
in  the  formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to 
another  outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  waters  by 
evaporation ;  and 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe,  and  the  50,000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars'  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 
valley  can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river 
basin  and  the  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irri- 
gated and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed ;  and 

Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  pro- 
tection and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  introduced  in 
the  House  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate 
by  Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplishment 
of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner:  Now.  therefore  be  it 

Resolved,  By  the  joint  convention  of  the  representatives  of  the  southern 
section  of  the  League  of  California  Municipalities  of  the  Farm  Bureaus  and 
Farm  Centers  of  Southern  California,  and  of  the  Imperial  irrigation  districts, 
duly  assembled  in  the  city  of  Santa  Anna.  Calif.,  on  Thursday,  the  4th  day  of 
May,  1922,  pursuant  to  call  and  notice  regularly  made  and  given,  that  House 
of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  *'  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  develop- 
ment of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin."  be  approved  and  indorsed. 

That  we  urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the 
Congress  the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this  bill 
that  the  relief  therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given. 

That  we  request  the  Senators  and  Congressmen  from  California  to  give 
their  special  attention  to  this  measure  and  press  its  adoption. 

Adopted  by  the  council  of  the  city  of  Berkeley  by  the  following  vote : 
Ayes :  Councilmen  Bartlett,  Harms,  Hey  wood,  Schmidt,  and  President  Bartlett. 
Noes :  None. 
Absent :  None. 

Louis  BARTLETT, 

Mayor  and  President  of  the  Council. 
Attest : 

E.  M.  HANN, 

City.  Clerk  and  Clerk  of  the  Council. 
Per  F.  E.  TURNER,  Deputy. 
MAY  19,  1922. 

RESOLUTION. 

Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the 
great  Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being 
overflowed  and  flooded  bj;  the  Colorado  River;  that  the  menace  of  this  river 
is  increasing  with  the  years;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a 
year;  that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke 
into  the  valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea ;  that  its  levees 
must  be  built  higher  each  year ;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levy  construc- 
tion is  very  poor  material  for  the  purpose ;  that  should  the  Colorado  River 
break  through  the  levees  again,  its  destruction  would  be  immeasurable;  and 
that  the  havoc  of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling,  because  it  would 
not  only  be  immediately  destructive  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent 
for  the  reason  that  its  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside  as  in  floods  most 
everywhere  else  but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below 
sea  level,  as  in  the  formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river 
again  turns  to  another  outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts 
their  waters  by  evaporation ;  and 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLOEADO   RIVER  BASIN.  91 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe  and  the  50.000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 
valley  can  he  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river 
basin,  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irrigated 
and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed;  and 

Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "To  provide  for  the  protec- 
tion and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  introduced  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate  by 
Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplishment 
of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner:  Now.  therefore,  he  it 

Reftolrcd.  By  the  city  council  of  the  city  of  Long  Beach,  Calif.,  in  regular 
session  held  on  Tuesday,  the  9th  day  of  May,  1922,  that  House  of  Representa- 
tives bill  No.  11449.  "  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  development  of  the 
lower  Colorado  River  Basin."  be  approved  and  indorsed. 

That  we  urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the 
Congress  the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this  bill 
that  the  relief  therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given. 

That  we  request  the  Senators  and  Congressmen  from  California  to  give 
their  special  attention  to  this  measure  and  press  its  adoption. 

I,  H.  C.  Waughop,  city  clerk  of  the  city  of  Long  Beach,  Calif.,  do  hereby 
certify  that  the  foregoing   resolution   was  unanimously  adopted  by   the  city 
council  of  the  city  of  Long  Beach  on  the  9th  day  of  May,  1922,  as  appears  in 
the  minutes  of  said  meeting,  by  the  following  vote: 
*  Ayes :  Condit,  Downs,  Pillsbury,  Workman,  Beck. 

Noes :  None. 

Absent :  Welch.  Buffum. 

LONG  BEACH,  CALIF.,  May  9,  1922. 

[SEAL.]  H.  C.  WAUGHOP,  City  Clerk. 

STATE  OF  CALIFORNIA, 

County  of  Los  Angeles,  City  of  Long  Beach,  ss: 

'  I,  H.  C.  Waughop.  city  clerk  of  the  city  of  Long  Beach,  do  hereby  certify 
that  the  foregoing  is  a  true  and  correct  copy  of  a  resolution  that  was  adopted 
by  the  city  council  of  the  city  of  Long  Beach,  Tuesday,  May  9,  1922,  as  ap- 
pears of  record  in  my  office. 

[SEAL.]  H.  C.  WAUGHOP, 

City  Clerk  of  the  City  of  Long  Beach. 


RESOLUTION  No.  910. 

Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the 
great  Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being 
overflowed  and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River ;  that  the  menace  of  this  river  is 
increasing  with  the  years;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a  year; 
that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke  into  the 
valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea;  that  its  levees  must  be 
built  higher  each  year ;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is 
very  poor  material  for  the  purpose ;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break 
through  the  levees  again,  its  destruction  would  the  immeasurable ;  and  that  the 
havoc  of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling,  because  it  would  not  only  be 
immediately  destructive  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent,  for  the  reason 
that  its  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside,  as  in  floods  most  everywhere  else, 
but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as  in  the 
formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to  another 
outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  the  centuries  again  lift  their  waters  by 
evaporation ;  and 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  poi'tending  catastrophe  and  the  50.000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 
valley  can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river 
basin,  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irrigated 
and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed;  and 

Whereas  House  bill  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  development 
of  the  Lower  Colorado  River  Basin."  introduced  in  the  House  of  Representatives 


92  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate  by  Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson, 
is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplishment  of  these  purposes  in  the  best 
and  most  practical  manner:  Now,  therefore,  be  it 

Rcsolri'tl  Inj  the  roin-inixxinn  of  the  citi/  of  Alhainbm.  Calif.,  at  their  regular 
meeting  held  on  Monday.  Mai/  1~>.  /<>..'>.  That  House  bill  11449,  "  To  provide  for 
the  protection  and  development  of  the  Lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  be  approved 
and  indorsed ;  that  we  urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands 
and  upon  the  Congress  the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage 
of  this  bill,  that  rhe  relief  therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given ;  that  we  request 
the  Senators  and  Congressmen  from  California  to  give  their  special  attention 
to  this  measure  and  press  its  adoption. 

Signed  and  approved  this  15th  day  of  May,  1922. 

N.  W.  THOMPSON, 

President  of  the  Commission  of  the  City  of  Alhambra. 
Attest: 

R.  B.  WALLACE, 

City  Clerk. 

I  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  resolution  was  duly  passed  and  adopted 
by  the  commission  of  the  city  of  Alhambra  at  its  regular  meeting  held  on  the 
15th  day  of  May,  1922.  by  the  following  votes :  Ayes.  Commissioners  Garrison, 
Battelle,  Bailey,  and  Thompson ;  noes,  none ;  absent,  Commissioner  Gibboney. 

[SEAL.]  R.  B.  WALLACE. 

City  Clerk. 

I,  R.  B.  Wallace,  do  hereby  certify  that  I  am  the  duly  qualified  and  acting 
city  clerk  of  the  city  of  Alhambra,  Calif.,  and  that  the  attached  is  a  mie  and 
correct  copy  of  resolution  No.  910,  which  was  adopted  by  the  commission  of  the 
city  of  Alhambra,  Calif.,  at  its  regular  meeting  held  on  the  loth  day  of 
May,  1922. 

Witness  my  hand  and  the  seal  of  the  city  of  Alhambra  this  17th  day  of 
May,  1922. 

[SEAL.]  R.  B.  WALLACE,  City  Clerk. 

RESOLUTION  ADOPTED  BY  THE  MAYOR  AND  COMMON  COUNCIL  OF  RIVERSIDE,  CALIF., 

ON  MAY  16,  1922. 

Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the  great 
Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being  over- 
flowed and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River ;  that  the  menace  of  this  river  is 
increasing  with  the  years;  that  its  bed  is  rilling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a  year; 
that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke  it  into  the 
valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea ;  that  its  levees  must  be 
built  higher  every  year;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is 
very  poor  material  for  the  purpose;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break 
through  the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immeasurable;  and  that  the 
havoc  of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling.  1  it-cause  it  would  not  only  be 
immediately  destructive  but  its  evil  effects  would  he  permanent,  for  the  reason 
that  its  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside,  as  in  floods  most  everywhere  else, 
but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as  in  the 
formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to  another 
outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  waters  by  evapora- 
tion ;  and 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe  and  the  50.000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars'  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 
valley  can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river 
basin,  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irrigated 
and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed ;  and 

Whereas  House  bill  11449,  to  provide  for  the  protection  and  development  of 
the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,  introduced  in  the  House  of  Representatives 
by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate  by  Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is 
a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplishment  of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and 
most  practical  manner :  Now,  therefore,  be  it 

Resolved,  That  we  hereby  approve  and  indorse  House  bill  11449,  to  provide 
for  the  protection  and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin ;  that 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN".  93 

we  urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the  Congress 
the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this  bill  that  the 
relief  therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given ;  that  we  request  the  Senators  and 
Congressmen  from  California  to  give  their  special  attention  to  this  measure  and 
press  its  adoption. 

I,  C.  B.  Burns,  clerk  of  the  city  of  Riverside,  Calif.,  do  hereby  certify  that  the 
foregoing  is  a  true  and  correct  copy  of  a  resolution  adopted  by  the  mayor  and 
common  council  of  said  city  of  Riverside  at  its  meeting  held  on  the  16th  day  of 
May,  1922. 

[SEAL.]  C.  B.  BURNS,  City  Clerk. 


RESOLUTION  INDORSING  THE  RESOLUTION  ADOPTED  AT  A  MEETING  HELD  IN  SANTA 
AXA.  MAY  5,  1922,  URGING  THE  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES  TO  PASS  BILL 
No.  11449. 

Whereas  there  is  now  pending  in  the  House  of  Representatives  of  the 
United  States  a  bill  "  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  development  of  the 
Lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  the  same  being  No.  11449 ;  and 

Whereas  at  a  public  meeting  of  the  League  of  California  Municipalities, 
held  in  Santa  Ana,  Calif.,  on  the  4th  day  of  May,  1922,  a  resolution  was 
adopted  by  said  meeting  urging  the  passage  of  said  bill;  and 

.Whereas  every  city  and  property  owner  in  southern  California  is  vitally 
interested  therein :  Now,  therefore,  be  it 

RexoU-ed  by  the  Council  of  the  City  of  Santa  Barbara,  That  the  sentiment 
expressed  in  said  resolution  be,  and  the  same  is  hereby,  indorsed. 


STATE  OF  CALIFORNIA, 

County  of  Santa  Barbara,  ss : 

I,  J.  E.  Sloan,  mayor  of  the  city  of  Santa  Barbara,  hereby  certify  that  the 
foregoing  resolution  was  read  in  full  at  a  regular  meeting  of  the  council  of 
the  city  of  Santa  Barbara,  held  on  the  18th  day  of  May,  1922,  and  was  adopted 
by  the  following  vote  on  roll  call : 

Yeas:  Councilman  S.  L.  Buck,  F.  W.  Cole,  H.  L.  Hitchcock,  Geo.  M.  Mc- 
Guire,  J.  E.  Sloan. 

Nays  :  None. 

Absent :  None. 

In  witness  whereof  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand  and  caused  the  official 
seal  to  be  affixed  this  19th  day  of  May,  1922. 

J.  E.  SLOAN,  Mayor. 

Attest : 

[SEAL.]  S.  B.  TAGGART,  City  Clerk. 

I  hereby  certify  the  above  to  be  a  true  and  correct  copy  of  the  resolution 
passed  by  the  city  of  Santa  Barbara  at  its  meeting  on  May  18,  1922. 

[SEAL.]  S.  B.  TAGGART,  City  Clerk. 

RESOLUTION  No.  4321. — A  RESOLUTION  OF  THE  BOARD  OF  DIRECTORS  OF  THE  CITY 
OF  PASADENA  INDORSING  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES  BILL  No.  11449, 

Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the 
Great  Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being 
overflowed  and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River:  that  the  menace  of  this  river 
is  increasing  with  the  years ;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a 
year;  that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke 
Into  the  valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea ;  that  its  levees 
must  be  built  higher  each  year;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construc- 
tion is  very  poor  material  for  the  purpose;  that  should  the  Colorado  River 
break  through  the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immesasurable ;  and 
tluit  the  havoc  of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling  because  it  would 
not  only  be  immediately  destructive  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent 
for  the  reason  that  it  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside,  as  in  floods  most 
everywhere  else,  but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley  which  is  below 
sea  level,  as  in  the  formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river 


94  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

again  turns  to  another  outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts 
these  waters  by  evaporation:  and 

Whereas  relief  can  he  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe,  and  the  50,000 
people  and  the  m'llions  of  dollars  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 
valley  can  he  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river 
basin,  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  he  irrigated^ 
and  immense  amounts  of  hyroelectric  power  can  be  developed:  and 

Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11440.  "To  provide  for  the  pro- 
tection and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin."  introduced  in  tin- 
House  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate  by 
Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplishment 
of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner:  Now,  therefore,  be  ic 

Renoir  fd  btt  th<    tionnl  of  directors  of  the  city  of  Pasadena: 

SECTION  1.  That  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "To  provide  for 
the  protection  and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  be  ap- 
proved and  indorsed.  That  the  city  of  Pasadena  urges  upon  the  Committee 
on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  the 
imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  said  bill  that  the  relief 
therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given,  and  further  requests  and  urges  that  the 
Senators  and  Congressmen  from  California  give  their  special  attention  to  this 
measure  and  press  its  adoption. 

SEC.  2.  The  city  clerk  shall  certify  to  the  adoption  of  this  resolution  and 
cause  copies  thereof  to  be  prepared,  certified,  and  forwarded  to  Grant  -M.  Lor- 
raine, secretary  southern  section  of  the  League  of  California  Municipalities  for 
transmission  by  him  to  the  Members  and  committees  of  Congress  herein  men- 
tioned. 

I  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  resolution  was  adopted  by  the  board  of 
directors  of  the  city  of  Pasadena  at  its  meeting  held  May  — ,  1922. 


Clerk  of  the  City  of  Pasadena. 
Signed  and  approved  this  -    -  day  of  May,  1922. 


Chairman  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  City  of  Pasadena, 

STATE  OF  CALIFORNIA,  County  of  Los  Angeles,  City  of  Pasadena,  ss: 
I,  Bessie  Chamberlain,  clerk  of  the  city  of  Pasadena,  do  hereby  certify  that 
the  attached  document  is  a  full,  true,  and  correct  copy  of  a  resolution  of  the 
city  of  Pasadena,  which  same  was  adopted  at  its  meeting  held  May  19,  1922. 

In  testimony  whereof  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand  and  affixed  the  corporate 
seal  of  the  city  of  Pasadena  this  19th  day  of  May,  1922. 


Clerk  of  the  City  of  Pasadena,  Calif. 


RESOLUTION  No.  788. — A  RESOLUTION  OF  THE  BOARD  OF  TRUSTEES  OF  THE  CITY 
OF  SANTA  ANA,  CALIF.,  INDORSING  AND  RECOMMENDING  THE  PASSAGE  OF  BILL 
No.  11449  Now  BEFORE  CONGRESS,  TO  PROVIDE  FOR  THE  PROTECTION  AND  DE- 
VELOPMENT OF  THE  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN. 

The  board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  Santa  Ana,  Calif.,  resolve  and  declare 
as  follows : 

Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the 
great  Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being 
overflowed  and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River ;  that  the  menace  of  this  river 
is  increasing  with  the  years;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a 
year;  that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke  into 
the  valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea ;  that  its  levees  must 
be  built  higher  each  year ;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  cons  ruction  is 
very  poor  material  for  the  purpose ;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break 
through  the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immeasurable :  and  that  the 
havoc  of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling  because  it  would  not  only  be 
immediately  destructive,  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent  for  the  reason 
that  its  waters  would  no"  run  off  or  subside,  as1  in  floods  most  everywhere  else, 
but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as  in  the 
formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to  another 
outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  waters  by  evapora- 
tion; and 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  95 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe  and  the  50,000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars'  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 
valley  can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-control  dams  in  the  river 
basin  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be  irrigated 
and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed  ;  and 

Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  pro- 
tection and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  introduced  in 
the  House  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate 
by  Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplish- 
ment of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner :  Now,  therefore, 
be  it 

Resolved,  by  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  the  City  of  Santa  Ana,  Calif.,  That 
House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  de- 
velopment of  the  lower  Colorado  River  basin,"  be  approved  and  indorsed ; 
that  we  urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the. 
Congress  the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this  bill 
that  the  relief  therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given ;  that  we  request  the  Sena- 
tors and  Congressmen  from  California  to  give  their  special  attention  to  this 
measure  and  press  its  adoption. 

Adopted  and  approved  this  15th  day  of  May,  1922. 

J.  G.  MITCHELL, 

President  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  City  of  Santa  Ana,  Calif. 
.  Attest: 

[SEAL.]  E.  L.  VEGELY,  City  Clerk. 

RESOLUTION  OF  THE  BOARD  OF  TRUSTEES  OF  THE  CITY  OF  SAN  GABRIEL  INDORSING 
HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES  BILL  No.  11449. 

The  Board  of  Trustees  of  the  City  of  San  Gabriel  do  resolve  as  follows  : 

W'hereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the  Great 
Imperial  Valley  in  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being  over- 
flowed and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River ;  that  the  menace  of  this  river  is 
increasing  with  the  years ;  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  rising  about  1  foot  a  year ; 
that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke  into  the 
valley  several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea ;  that  its  levees  must  be 
built  high  each  year;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is  very 
poor  material  for  the  purpose;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break  through 
the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immeasurable ;  and  that  the  havoc  of 
its  deluge  would  he  great  and  appalling,  because  it  would  be  not  only  im- 
mediately destructive,  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent,  for  the  reason 
that  its  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside,  as  in  floods  most  everywhere 
else,  but  would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as 
in  the  formation  of  the  Salton  Sea.  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to 
another  outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  wraters  by 
evaporation  :  and 

Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe  and  the  50,000 
people  and  the  millions  of  dollars  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in  this 
valley  can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood  dams  in  the  river  basin, 
and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  land  can  be  irrigated  and 
immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed  ;  and 

Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449.  "  To  provide  for  the  pro- 
tection and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin."  introduced  in 
the  House  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate  by 
Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  development  and 
accomplishment  of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner :  Now. 
therefore,  be  it 

ResoJretl  inj  xaiil  Board  of  Trustees  of  the  City  />f  Xan  Ualtrid.  That  House  of 
Representatives  hill  Xo.  11440.  "To  provide  for  the  protection  and  development 
of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin,"  be  approved  and  indorsed;  that  the  city  of 
San  Gabriel  urges  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon 
the  Congress  of  the  United  States  the  imperative  necessity  of  an  early  report 
and  passage  of  said  bill  that  the  relief  therein  propose.]  may  soon  be  given  ;  and 
further  requests  and  urges  that  the  Senators  and  Congressmen  from  California 
give  their  special  attention  to  this  measure  and  press  its  adoption. 


96  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

The  city  clerk  shall  certify  to  the  adoption  of  this  resolution  and  cause  copies 
thereof  to  be  prepared  and  forwarded  to  Grant  M.  Lorraine,  secretary  southern 
section  of  the  League  of  California  Municipalities  for  transmission  by  him  to 
the  Members  and  committees  of  Congress  herein  mentioned. 


I,  Ira  H.  Stouffer,  city  clerk  of  the  city  of  San  Gabriel,  do  hereby  certify 
that  the  foregoing  resolution  was  duly  adopted  at  a  regular  meeting  of  the 
board  of  trustees  of  the  city  of  San  Gabriel,  held  on  the  23d  day  of  May, 
1922,  by  the  following  vote: 

Ayes :  Brownrigg,  Dake,  Fisk,  Lettler,  and  Lugo. 
Noes :   None. 
Absent :  None. 

IRA  H.  STOUFFER. 

City  Clerk  of  the  city  of  San  Gabriel. 
Signed  and  approved  this  23d  day  of  May,  1922. 
[SEAL.]  GEO.  D.  DAKE, 

President  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  of  the  city  of  San  Gabriel. 


RESOLUTION  No.  327. 

Whereas  the  President  has  introduced  in  the  House  of  Representatives  of 
the  present  Congress  House  bill  No.  11449,  which  said  bill  provides  the  means 
whereby  the  lower  basin  of  the  Colorado  River  may  be  protected  from  floods 
and  additional  lands  further  developed ; 

Whereas  during  periods  of  every  year  the  people  who  have,  with  com- 
mendable courage  and  great  expenditure  of  money,  reclaimed  a  trackless 
desert  into  one  of  the  most  productive  sections  of  our  Nation  are  threatened 
with  the  loss  of  their  lives  and  their  entire  investment  by  reason  of  the  un- 
controlled waters  of  >  the  Colorado  River ;  and 

Whereas  the  bill  above  mentioned  if  passed  will  not  only  provide  security 
for  these  people,  but  will  also  reclaim  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  addi- 
tional lands  now  valuless :  Now,  therefore,  be  it 

Resolved  by  the  council  of  the  city  of  Santa  Monica,  That  the  said  bill  be, 
and  the  same  is  hereby,  indorsed,  and  its  passage  in  the  House  and  Senate 
and  approval  by  the  President  urged,  and,  further,  that  the  clerk  of  the  city 
of  Santa  Monica  be  authorized  to  communicate  by  wire  with  Hon.  H.  Z. 
Osborne.  our  Representative  in  Congress,  requesting  that  he  use  every  en- 
deavor to  procure  that  result,  and  that  a  copy  of  this  resolution  be  forwarded 
to  the  following :  Hon.  Herbert  Hoover,  Secretary  of  Commerce ;  Hon.  H.  Z. 
Osborne,  Representative  in  Congress ;  Committee  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives on  Flood  Control. 


I,  Frank  A.  Helton,  commissioner  of  finance,  ex  officio  clerk  of  the  city  of 
Santa  Monica,  do  hereby  certify  that  the  above  is  a  copy  of  a  resolution  duly 
nnd  regularly  adopted  by  the  council  of  the  city  of  Santa  Monica  at  its  meet- 
ing held  in  said  city  on  the  19th  day  of  May,  1922. 

F.  A.  HELTON, 
Commissioner  of  Finance, 
Ex-offlcio  Clerk  of  the  City  of  Santa  Monica. 


CORONADO,  CALIF.,  July  2,  1922. 
JOHN  L.  BACON, 

Care  Congressman  Phil  D.  Swing,  Washington,  D.  C.: 

Coronado  heartily  indorses  House  bill  No.  11449.    Authorize  you  to  represent 
us  at  hearings. 

W.  E.  HARPER, 
President  of  the  Board  of  Trustees,  City  of  Coronado. 


DEVELOPMENT    OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  97 

RESOLUTION  No.  27690. 

Be  it  rctoJred  lt;<  the  common  council  of  the  citi/  of  Xan  Diego,  Calif.,  as 
folJoirs :  That  the  following  resolution,  adopted  at  Santa  Ana,  Calif.,  May  4, 
1922.  at  a  called  convention  of  representatives  of  the  southern  section  of  the 
League  of  California  Municipalities,  of  the  farm  bureaus,  and  farm  centers 
of  southern  California,  and  of  the  Imperial  irrigation  districts,  be,  and  the 
same  is  hereby,  adopted  as  an  expression  of  opinion  of  the  common  council  of 
said  city : 

"  Whereas  it  is  apparent  to  all  persons  acquainted  with  the  facts  that  the 
great  Imperial  Valley  of  California  is  annually  in  imminent  danger  of  being 
overflowed  and  flooded  by  the  Colorado  River  ;  that  the  menace  of  this  river  is  in- 
creasing with  the  years :  that  its  bed  is  filling  and  raising  about  1  foot  a  year ; 
that  its  bottom  is  now  several  feet  higher  than  it  was  when  it  broke  into  the  valley 
several  years  ago  and  formed  the  Salton  Sea ;  that  its  levees  must  be  built 
higher  each  year;  that  the  only  available  dirt  for  levee  construction  is  very 
poor  material  for  the  purpose ;  that  should  the  Colorado  River  break  through 
the  levees  again  its  destruction  would  be  immeasurable ;  and  that  the  havoc 
of  its  deluge  would  be  great  and  appalling  because  it  would  not  only  be  immedi- 
ately destructive  but  its  evil  effects  would  be  permanent  for  the  reason  that 
its  waters  would  not  run  off  or  subside,  as  in  floods  most  everywhere  else,  but 
would  gather  in  the  basin  of  the  valley,  which  is  below  sea  level,  as  in  the 
formation  of  the  Salton  Sea,  and  remain  until  the  river  again  turns  to  an- 
other outlet  and  until  the  sunshine  of  centuries  again  lifts  these  waters  by 
evaporation ;  and 

"  Whereas  relief  can  be  had  from  this  portending  catastrophe,  and  the 
50,000  people  and  the  millions  of  dollars'  worth  of  land  and  other  property  in 
this  valley  can  be  made  safe  by  the  construction  of  flood-contral  dams  in  the 
river  basin ;  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  of  additional  lands  can  be 
irrigated,  and  immense  amounts  of  hydroelectric  power  can  be  developed;  and 

"  Whereas  House  of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  "  To  provide  for  the 
protection  and  development  of  the  lower  Colorado  River  Basin.  "  introduced  in 
the  House  of  Representatives  by  Congressman  Phil  Swing  and  in  the  Senate 
by  Senator  Hiram  W.  Johnson,  is  a  measure  looking  to  the  early  accomplish- 
ment of  these  purposes  in  the  best  and  most  practical  manner :  Now.  therefore, 
be  it 

"Resolved  'by  the  joint  convention  of  the  representatives  of  the  southern* 
xcction  of  the  League  of  California  Municipalities,  of  the  farm  bureaus,  and 
farm  centers  of  southern  California,  and  of  the  Imperial  irrigation  districts, 
dutii  nxxcnibled  in  the  city  of  Santa  Ana,  Calif.,  on  Thursday,  the  .'/th  day  of 
M<n/,  1922,  pursuant  to  call  and  notice  regularly  made  and  given,  That  House 
of  Representatives  bill  No.  11449,  '  To  provide  for  the  protection  and  develop- 
ment of  the  lower  Colorado  River  basin, '  be  approved  and  indorsed ;  that  we 
urge  upon  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands  and  upon  the  Congress 
the  impressive  necessity  of  an  early  report  and  passage  of  this  bill  that  the 
relief  therein  proposed  may  soon  be  given ;  that  we  request  the  Senators  and 
Congressman  from  California  to  give  their  special  attention  to  this  measure 
and  press  its  adoption ;  "  and  be  it 

Resolved,  That  this  common  council  urges  that  all  possible  means 
be  taken  to  expedite  the  passage  of  the  bill  mentioned  in  the  above  resolution ; 
and  be  it 

Resolved,  That  a  copy  of  this  resolution  be  forwarded  by  the  city  clerk 
to  each  of  the  Representatives  and  Senators  from  the  State  of  California. 

I  hereby  certify  the  above  to  be  a  full,  true,  and  correct  copy  of  Resolution 
No.  27690  of  the  common  council  of  the  city  of  San  Diego  as  adopted  by  said 
council  May  15,  1922. 

[SEAL.]  ALLEN  H.  WRIGHT,  City  Clerk. 


Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  also  suggest  that  the  text  of  the  article  by  Mr.  Grunsky,  who 
is  a  very  able  engineer,  be  printed  in  the  record,  omitting  the  illustrations. 
Mr.  LITTLE.  Is  there  any  objection?    If  not,  that  will  be  done. 


98  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

(The  paper  referred  to  follows:) 

CONTROLLING  THE  PRINCIPAL  ARTERY  OF  THE  SOUTHWEST  STATES — ONE  OF  THE 
FOREMOST  AUTHORITIES  ON  THE  COLORADO  RIVER  DISCUSSES  THE  SITUATION 
Xow  BEFORE  THE  COLORADO  RIVER  COMMISSION  IN  THE  LIGHT  OF  THE  FUTURE 
INDUSTRIAL  AND  AGRICULTURAL  POSSIBILITIES  OF  THE  SOUTHWEST. 

[By  C.  E.  Grunsky,  Consulting  Engineer.] 

The  Boulder  Canyon  dam  site  is  located  just  above  the  point  where  the  Colo- 
rado River  makes  its  abrupt  turn  from  a  westerly  to  a  southerly  course.  It 
is  some  60  miles  in  an  air  line  above  the  point  where  California's  east  boundary 
line  strikes  the  river  and  is  between  three  and  four  miles  below  the  mouth  of 
the  Virgin  River.  The  river  at  this  point  forms  the  boundary  between  Nevada 
on  the  north  and  Arizona  on  the  south.  The  canyon  is  narrow,  being  gen- 
erally reported  as  about  250  feet  wide  for  a  distance  of  one-half  mile.  The 
sides  of  the  gorge  are  steep.  The  rock  is  granite.  The  project  for  storage  at 
this  site  as  now  favored  by  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service  involves  the 
construction  of  a  dam  that  would  rise  to  a  height  of  550  feet  above  the  water 
surface  of  the  river,  forming  a  reservoir  with  a  storage  capacity  in  excess  of 
25,000,000  acre-feet.  The  discharge  of  Colorado  River  at  this  'point  may  be 
noted,  in  approximate  figures,  as  ranging  from  7,000,000  to  22.000.000  acre-feet 
per  year.  The  normal  annual  discharge  of  the  river  is  about  15.000,000  acre- 
feet.  The  water  of  a  full  reservoir  would  extend  up  the  Colorado  River  into 
the  lower  end  of  the  Grand  Canyon.  A  large  portion  of  the  storage  space  would 
be  afforded  by  the  lower  valley  of  the  Virgin  River.  The  surface  area  of  the 
reservoir  may  reach  125,000  acres  from  which  the  loss  by  evaporation  would  be 
about  750,000  acre-feet  per  annum. 

The  feasibility  of  a  dam  of  the  dimensions  proposed  seems  now  to  be  gener- 
ally accepted  by  the  engineers  who  have  investigated  the  dam  site.  A  reser- 
voir at  this  point  would  control  the  flow  of  the  Colorado  except  the  contribu- 
tions by  the  Gila  River,  and  could  be  so  manipulated  that  it  would  eliminate 
the  lower  river  flood  menace  to  the  extent  that  it  is  due  to  up  river  high  stages. 
It  would  regulate  the  flow  of  the  river  for  irrigation  purposes  and  would  permit 
the  generation  of  about  600,000  horsepower.  The  power  thus  generated  would 
be  available  for  use  at  points  as  far  removed  as  San  Francisco,  but  the  princi- 
pal place  of  use  would  naturally  be  in  Arizona,  Nevada,  southern  Utah,  and 
southern  portions  of  California. 

The  up-river  use  of  water  for  irrigation  is  increasing.  Some  small  diversions 
of  water  from  the  headwaters  of  the  Colorado  River  into  adjacent  drainage 
basins  are  already  accomplished  and  others  are  under  contemplation.  It  is- 
not  now  known  to  what  extent  this  up-river  use  of  water  will  decrease  the 
discharge  of  the  river  through  the  Boulder  Canyon  and  there  1s  consequently 
some  conjecture  as  to  whether  the  above  indicated  power  output  can  be  real- 
ized. In  any  event  there  will  always  be  a  sufficient  flow  to  make  storage  worth 
while,  and  the  natural  flow  alone  to  which  unassailable  down-river  rights  have 
already  been  established  by  beneficial  use  would  justify  the  use  of  the  water 
in  generating  power  if  a  dam  of  any  consderable  height  is  placed  in  Boulder 
Canyon.  It  may  be  noted  in  this  connection  that  the  Tuma  project  will  require 
a  summer  flow  of  1,500  to  1.700  second-feet  and  has  been  actually  using  1.100 
to  1,200  second-feet.  Imperial  irrigation  district  for  use  on  the  lands  of  the 
district  and  on  a  smaller  area  in  Mexico  has  been  diverting  and  using  over 
6,000  second-feet  in  summer  and  more  than  one-third  of  this  amount  at  times 
of  minimum  demand  in  winter.  So,  too,  at  Palo  Verde  there  has  been  diversion 
and  use  on  a  large  scale.  Plans  for  extension  of  irrigation  in  the  lower  river 
regions  have  been  made,  notably  in  the  case  of  Imperial  Valley,  where  it  is 
proposed  to  add  some  400,000  acres  to  the  irrigated  area.  But  any  such  ex- 
tension of  irrigated  areas  is  conditioned  on  conserving  the  present  wastage  of 
flood  waters.  This  wastage  is  large,  as  will  be  seen,  when  the  volume  of  flow 
reaching  Laguna  Dam.  about  16,000,000  acre-feet  per  year,  is  compared  with 
the  amount  diverted  by  Yurna  reclamation  project  and  the  Imperial  irrigation 
district  together,  about  2,500,000  acre-feet. 

ANOTHER    COLORADO    FLOOD    IMMINENT.  ^r 

There  is  another  urgent  reason,  aside  from  extension  of  irrigated  areas  and 
power  development,  for  the  early  construction  of  a  big  regulating  reservoir 
somewhere  not  too  far  up  on  the  Colorado.  This  is  the  control  of  floods.  The 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  99 

floods  on  the  lower  river  have  become  a  serious  menace  to  the  river's  delta  lands. 
Adequate  storage  facilities  on  the  river  under  proper  control  would  reduce 
the  peak  of  all  flood  discharges,  except  only  those  which  originate  in  the  water- 
shed of  the  Gila  River.  It  should  be  noted,  however,  in  this  connection  that 
such  storage  alone  will  not  completely  solve  the  flood-control  problem.  Colo- 
|  rndo  River  is  now  running  wild  in  that  portion  of  its  delta  which  lies  to  the 
r  southward  of  a  line  about  20  miles  south  of  and  roughly  parallel  with  the 
south  boundary  of  California.  Ever  since  the  river  abandoned  its  channel 
at  a  point  near  the  south  line  of  Arizona  in  1909  it  has  been  flowing  westerly 
from  that  point  and  has  piled  its  drift  and  silt  into  the  Volcano  Lake  region. 
The  lake  has  been  practically  obliterated  by  silt  deposits.  In  consequence  of 
the  increasing  obstruction  thus  placed  in  the  way  of  flood  water  the  flood  plane 
is  rising  at  the  rate  of  about  1  foot  a  year,  and  has  now  progressed  to  the 
point  where  the  river  at  its  high  stages  will  begin  again  to  overtop  its  natural 
banks  in  the  20-mile  stretch  in  which  the  river  forms  the  boundary  between 
Arizona  and  Mexico,  and  its  high  waters  may  become  a  menace  to  levees  whose 
bases  have  been  barely  lapped  with  water  for  some  years  past.  This  situation 
demands  action  which  should  not  he  delayed.  The  United  States  should  take 
whatever  measures  are  necessary  to  secure  the  right  from  Mexico  to  put  the 
Colorado  River  back  upon  a  direct  course  to  the  Gulf  of  California,  and  this 
should  be  done  at  once,  regardless  of  whether  storage  works  are  constructed 
or  not. 

ONE  HUNDRED   AND  EIGHTY   MILLION   TONS  OF    SILT. 

The  silt  carried  by  the  river  is  a  factor  to  be  considered  in  the  planning 
of  storage  facilities.  The  river  carries  in  suspension  annually  about  180,000,000 
ton*  of  silt  and  rolls  some  more  along  its  bottom.  An  average  of  over  100.000 
acre-feet  of  well  compacted  sediment  are  brought  down  to  the  river  delta 
annually.  Perhaps  80.000  to  90,000  acre-feet  of  deposit  in  a  reservoir  at 
Boulder  Canyon  should,  therefore,  be  expected.  This  would,  of  course,  ac- 
cumulate in  the  upstream  portions  of  any  reservoir  that  is  at  the  points  where 
the  water  loses  its  silt-transporting  power.  If  the  Boulder  Canyon  project  is 
carried  out,  it  would  take  the  silt  about  30  years  to  destroy  one-tenth  of  the 
proposed  storage  capacity,  consequently  deterioration  due  to  the  accumulation 
of  silt  in  the  reservoir  is  not  a  serious  problem  from  an  economic  standpoint. 

THE   ADVANTAGES    OF   AN    UPPER   DAM. 

As  an  alternative  to  the  early  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  project 
a  reservoir  farther  upstream  above  Lee's  Ferry  in  Glen  Canyon  has  been 
suggested.  Here,  too,  there  is  a  narrow  canyon,  but  the  walls  are  sandstone 
instead  of  granite.  A  loose  rock  dam  with  an  effective  height  of  over  700  feet 
and  a  storage  capacity  of  over  40,000,000  acre-feet  has  been  suggested  for  this 
site.  A  reservoir  at  the  Glen  Canyon  site  would  be  less  effective  in  controlling 
floods,  being  some  300  miles  farther  upstream,  and  it  would  he  farther  removed 
from  the  power  market.  But  a  dam  at  this  point  would  have  the  particular 
advantage  of  so  checking  and  regulating  the  major  portion  of  the  river  flow 
fhat  the  cor.strucricn  of  other  dams  farther  downstream  would  be  facilitated. 
Its  construction,  although  perhaps  not  to  the  extreme  height  suggested,  would 
be  in  line  with  the  ultimate  maximum  utilization  of  the  river  flow,  because 
if  used  in  conjunction  with  a  high  dam  at  some  down-river  point  the  water  from 
tin's  upper  storage  could  be  liberated  at  rates  adjusted  to  power  requirements 
without  regard  to  irrigation  demands,  and  the  regulation  for  irrigation  would 
be  effected  entirely  at  the  downstream  reservoir. 

WATER    ENOUGH    FOR    ALL. 

There  are  one  or  two  facts  which  stand  out  prominently,  as,  for  example,  the 
apparently  slight  effect  of  the  increase  of  the  use  of  water  at  up-river  points 
upon  the  amount  of  water  which  reaches  the  Laguna  Dam,  near  Yuma.  The 
records  of  discharge  lack  the  accuracy  and  fail  to  go  back  far  enough  to  make 
the  effect  of  up-river  irrigation  of  about  1.150,000  acres  upon  this  flow  apparent. 
To  what  extent,  then,  will  the  addition  of  perhaps  1,600,000  acres  more  to  this 
irrigated  area  reduce  the  flow?  Of  the  3,000,000  acre-feet  of  water  required 
for  this  area  a  part  only,  say  2.000,000  acre-feet,  should  be  subtracted  from  the 
•down-river  discharge.  Assuming  the  minimum  yearly  supply  at  Boulder  Can- 
yon  to  be  7,000,000  acre-feet  under  present  conditions  and  the  normal  about 


100  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

13,000,000  acre-feet,  then,  without  restricting  the  use  of  Colorado  River  water 
for  irrigation  in  Wyoming,  Colorado.  Utah,  New  Mexico,  Arizona,  and  Nevada, 
there  will  still  be  3,000,000  to  9,000,000  acre-feet  of  water  per  annum  that  will 
go  to  waste  after  supplying  the  present  needs  of  lower-river  irrigators  who 
now  have  some  700,000  acres  in  cultivation. 

Storage  on  a  large  scale  is  essential  to  reduce  this  waste  and  to  make  some 
of  the  water  of  the  years  of  larger  flow  available  in  the  years  of  light  run-off; 
but  in  analyzing  the  effectiveness  of  a  reservoir  for  this  purpose  it  must  be 
remembered  that  if  the  water  released  from  storage  is  to  serve  both  for  the 
generation  of  power  and  for  irrigation,  the  head  at  the  dam  should  never  be 
completely  sacrificed,  and  that,  therefore,  the  effective  reservoir  capacity  should 
be  entered  into  a  calculation  at  much  less  than  the  full  capacities  as  above 
noted. 

The  cost  of  providing  a  reservoir  at  the  Boulder  Canyon  site  is  generally 
given  at  upward  of  $30,000,000. 

WHO  SHOULD  BUILD  THE  DAM? 

The  agency  which  should  carry  out  the  regulation  of  the  flow  of  the  lower 
river  in  the  interest  of  irrigation,  for  the  development  of  power,  and  for  flood 
control  should  be  the  United  States;  but  if  private  parties  are  ready  to  under- 
take the  work,  subject  to  such  control  by  Federal  Government  and  such  regula- 
tions as  may  be  necessary  to  properly  guard  conflicting  interests  and  establish 
rights,  there  can  be  no  valid  objection  to  granting  such  private  parties  per- 
mission to  proceed  with  the  work. 

In  no  event  should  the  right  to  control  be  passed  on  to  the  several  States 
which  are  interested  in  the  conservation  and  use  of  the  waters  of  the  Colorado 
River  and  its  tributaries.  It  is  well  enough  for  the  Colorado  River  Commission, 
which  is  now  functioning  with  Mr.  Herbert  C.  Hoover  at  its  head,  to  define 
the  relative  interests  of  these  States  in  the  waters  of  the  river,  but  despite 
all  that  any  of  these  States  can  do  in  the  matter  of  putting  the  water  to  bene- 
ficial use  there  will  still  be  a  surplus  to  flow  down  the  river  into  its  lower  reaches 
and  the  works  here  under  discussion  will  certainly  be  carried  out  in  some 
form. 

If  the  United  States  undertakes  the  work,  then  suitable  provision  should  be 
made  for  wholesnling  the  water  to  the  districts  that  are  irrigated  with  water 
that  is  made  available  by  storage,  a  fair  charge  should  be  made  to  the  power 
companies  who  obtain  power  from  this  source  for  distribution,  and  annual 
benefits  should  be  assessed  against  the  regions  which  are  benefited  by  flood 
control,  or,  of  course,  there  might  be  an  equivalent  immediate  or  early  return 
to  the  United  States  of  capital  investment,  which  could  best  be  accomplished  by 
issuing  bonds  and  turning  the  same  over  to  the  United  States. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  We  will  now  hear  Mr.  Criswell.  I  believe  you  are  president  of 
the  City  Council  of  Los  Angeles,  Mr.  Criswell. 

STATEMENT  OF  MB.  RALPH  CRISWELL,  PRESIDENT  OF  THE  CITY 
COUNCIL,  LOS  ANGELES,  CALIF. 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Yes,  sir;  I  am  president  of  the  city  council  of  Los  Angeles.  We 
in  Los  Angeles,  of  course,  are  interested  in  this  problem  in  the  Imperial  Valley,  to 
tliis  extent,  that  our  wholesalers  and  jobbers  supply  the  merchants  in  that 
territory  and  our  financiers  have  money  invested  there  in  the  form  of  loans,, 
which  has  been  brought  out,  are  not  very  safe  at  the  present  time.  The  pros- 
perity of  that  country  adds  to  the  prosperity  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles,  but 
we  are  particularly  interested  in  the  power  which  may  be  developed  at  the 
Boulder  Canyon  Dam.  The  city  of  Los  Angeles  for  a  number  of  years  has  been 
engaged  in  the  generation  and  distribution  of  hydro  electric  power.  We  have 
something  like  $25,000,000  invested  in  that  project  now. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  That  was  in  connection  with  the  construction  of  the  Owens 
River  Aqueduct? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  That  is  in  connection  with  the  Owens  River  Aqueduct.  We 
have  not  power  possibilities  sufficient  to  meet  our  demands  for  power,  and  we 
have  for  some  years  been  looking  about,  prospecting  for  other  power  sites. 
Some  of  these  sites  on  which  we  hnve  spent  considerable  money  for  preliminary 
survey,  and  so  forth,  are  not  the  best  sites  and  can  not  develop  power  nearly 
as  cheaply  as  it  can  be  developed  at  the  Boulder  Canyon.  Therefore,  we  are 
interested  in  the  building  of  the  dam  at  Boulder  Canyon  and  the  allocation: 
of  the  power  privileges  at  that  dam. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN.  101 

For  three  or  four  years  our  power  department  has  not  encouraged,  and  in 
fact  has  refused  to  negotiate  with  people  who  desire  to  locate  factories  or 
smelters  or  refineries  in  Los  Angeles,  because  we  did  not  feel  that  we  were 
safe  in  guaranteeing  power  at  a  given  cost.  If  we  could  have  allocated  to  us 
a  proportion  of  the  power  to  be  developed  at  that  dam,  that  problem  would 
be  solved  and  some  of  the  tentative  sites  which  we  are  now  working  upon  in 
the  Sierra  Nevada  Mountains  would  be  abandoned  by  the  city. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Are  you  meeting  with  objection  in  northern  California  to 
development  by  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  of  power  sites  in  the  Sierra  Nevada 
Mountains  north  of  the  Tehachapi  Pass? 

Mr.  Cms  WELL.  Yes;  I  had  reference  to  those. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  In  other  words,  the  people  of  that  section  of  the  State  believe 
that  power  developed  in  that  territory  should  be  utilized  in  northern  Cali- 
fornia and  not  transported  to  southern  California? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  We  have  been  told  that  that  is  their  attitude. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  What  is  the  maximum  amount  of  power  that  the  city  of  Los 
Angeles  would  like  to  have  from  the  proposed  development  at  the  Boulder 
( 'anyon  Dam? 

Mr.  <  'itiswELL.  The  city  of  Los  Angeles  at  the  present  time  has  installation 
for  about  100,000  horsepower.     We  are  actually  developing  75,000  horsepower 
and  are  to-day  purchasing  from  a  private  power  company  about  35,000  horse- 
power. 
,    Mr.  B  ARBOUR.  Is  that  all  used  by  the  city? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  That  is  all  used  by  the  city. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Does  the  city  own  its  own  plant? 

Mr.  CUISWELL.  The  city  owns  generating  plants  of  its  own  along  the  line  of 
the  aqueduct. 

Mr.  HARBOUR.  Does  that  include  the  power  used  on  the  railway  lines? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  That  does  not  include  the  power  used  by  the  street  railways, 
no. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  Could  you  say  how  much  is  being  used  by  the  street  railways? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  I  do  not  have  that  figure  in  mind. 

We  are  getting  a  very  high  degree  of  efficiency  from  our  installation  at  the 
present  time.  Ordinarily  a  plant  does  not  turn  out  more  than  two-thirds  firm 
horsepower  <>f  the  amount  of  the  installation.  We  are  getting  about  three- 
fourths.  The  city  of  Los  Angeles  is  in  this  position;  we  do  not  want  to  say  at 
this  time  the  amount  of  horsepower  we  would  like  to  have  allocated  to  us,  fur- 
ther than  this,  that  after  all  communities  in  the  Southwest — Arizona,  Nevada, 
and  California — -after  all  other  communities  have  been  allocated  the  power 
which  they  want  and  which  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  feels  he  is  justified 
in  allocating  to  them,  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  will  agree  to  take  all  that  is  left. 
We  will  enter  into  a  contract  to  that  effect. 

Mr.  WILLIAMSON.  Would  that  plan  of  utilization  insure  the  full  development 
of  the  plant  in  the  beginning? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  It  would.  It  is  our  opinion  that  a  certain  amount  of  power 
or  power  possibilities  should  be  reserved  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  for 
future  allocation  to  communities  that  can  not  act  at 'the  present  time — that 
might  be  slower  to  act  than  are  some  of  the  cities  that  have  been  figuring  on  this 
for  sometime  and  are  ready  to  act;  that  those  power  possibilities  should  be 
reserved  for  future  allocation,  but  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  would  agree  that 
if  nobody  took  any  power  and  if  half  of  that  power,  we  will  say,  was  reserved 
at  the  present  time,  we  will  pay  for  the  power  that  is  allocated  to  us  a  sum 
sufficient  to  meet  the  interest  and  the  sinking  fund  charges,  and  we  will  get 
cheap  power  then. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Do  you  mean  interest  and  sinking  fund  on  the  entire  cost  of 
the  project? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  On  the  entire  cost  of  the  project. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  That  was  stated  yesterday  to  be  about  $8,000,000  a  year. 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Something  like  that. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Do  you  believe  that  Los  Angeles  could  afford  to  pay  $8,000.000  a 
year  for  this  proposition  on  the  Colorado  River  if  they  could  get  the  power? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Well,  I  would  not  want  to  say  $8,000,000,  because  I  do  not 
have  the  figure  in  mind,  and  I  haven't  it  in  my  notes  here,  but,  I  do  say  that 
we  have  figured  the  cost  of  the  dam  and  the  cost  of  the  installation  of  generat- 
ing machinery  and  the  cost  of  the  transmission  line,  and  we  would  be  willing 
to  bear  the  burden,  if  necessary,  on  the  whole  proposition. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Providing  you  got  power? 


102  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.     . 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Providing  we  got  the  power.  But  we  are  not  asking  that, 
understand  that,  gentlemen — we  are  imt  asking  for  any  power  until  all  of  these 
other  communities  have  heen  satisfied. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  You  refer  to  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam? 

Mr.  CKISWELL.  To  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam;  yes. 

Mr.  P,ARi:oru.  Following  right  along  that  line,  would  the  city  of  Los  Angeles 
be  willing  to  take  over  this  Boulder  Canyon  project  and  construct  the  dam,  if 
the  Government,  permitted  it  to  do  s«>.  at  ;s  own  expense? 

Mr.  CKISWELL.  On  account  of  limitations  in  our  charter  for  bonding  provisions 
we  could  not  do  that,  and  that  leads  me  to  another  point:  Tn  the  suggestion 
that  is  made  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interor  in  his  report  to  this  committee 
he  suggests  that  bonds  be  issued  for  the  building  of*  these  works  and  that  those 
bonds  be  sold  at  a  bonus  if  possible.  I  presume  the  idea  he  had  in  mind  was 
that  the  bonus  would  cover  the  interest  on  the  bonds  during  the  period  of 
construction.  The  charter  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  would  prohibit  us  from 
] laying  a  bonus,  but  we  can  accomplish  it  directly  by  contracting  that  we  will 
agree  to  pay  this  interest  during  construction,  but  we  could  not  agree  to 
nay  a  bonus  for  bonds,  and  I  doubt  very  much  whether  there  is  a  municipality 
in  southern  California  that  could  pay  a  bonus  for  the  bonds;  and  many  of 
them,  including  perhaps  Los  Angeles,  could  not  purchase  bonds  but  we  could 
find  a  purchaser. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  What  is  your  idea — for  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  as  a  munici- 
pality to  purchase  some  of  these  bonds? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  I  just  said  that  I  doubt  whether  we  could  under  our  charter 
limitations  do  so.  but  we  could  find  a  purchaser. 

Mr.  BARBOUR,  If  they  could  be  purchased  at  par? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  I  doubt  whether  we  could  purchase  them  even  at  par. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Have  you  heard  any  suggestion  as  to  the  per  cent  of 
power  to  be  reserved  for  future  development?  Has  there  been  a  suggestion 
made  along  that  line? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  No ;  there  have  been  no  percentages  figured  out  that  I  know 
of.  You  understand  that  the  installation  of  power  machinery  there  would  ex- 
tend over  a  number  of  years  before  it  could  all  be  installed,  even  though  we 
worked  as  rapidly  as  possible. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  In  the  statement  which  you  made  a  moment  ago.  did  you 
have  in  mind  the  future  development  in  the  State,  which  you  enumerated  for 
allocation? 

Mr.  CKISWELL.  I  did :  in  my  suggestion  that  a  portion  of  this  power,  a  cer- 
tain percentage  of  it,  should  be  reserved  for  future  allocation. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  That  is,  the  city  of  Los  Angeles,  after  allocation  to  Ari- 
zona, Nevada,  and  California  outside  of  Los  Angeles,  would  be  willing  to  take 
the  surplus  power? 

Mr.  CRTSWELL.  That  was  my  statement.    That  is  what  I  meant  to  say. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  With  reservation  for  future  development  in  those  particu- 
lar States? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Mr.  Cri swell,  does  your  city  charter  permit  you  to  dispose  of  elec- 
tric energy  that  the  city  has  control  of  outside  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Would  it  permit  it? 

Mr.  RAKER.  Yes. 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  It  would  permit  us  to  dispose  of  it — yes — but  under  a  contract 
which  we  entered  into  with  the  Southern  California  Edison  Co.  when  we 
purchased  their  distributing  system  inside  of  the  city  we  agreed  not  to  interfere 
with  their  market  outside  of  the  city,  but  any  surplus  power  we  generate  shall 
be  sold  to  that  company  at  a  price  fixed  by  the  State  railroad  commission. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Now,  supposing  the  power  was  allocated  to  Utah,  Colorado,  and 
New  Mexico,  Arizona,  and  Nevada,  to  certain  large  cities  outside  of  Los 
Angeles,  and  the  balance  to  be  taken  by  Los  Angeles,  would  it  be  your  pur- 
pose and  intent  in  taking  your  line  from  Boulder  Canyon  to  Los  Angeles  to 
supply  the  small  cities  and  communities  in  southern  California  with  elec- 
tric energy  at  the  same  price  that  you  supplied  it  to  the  people  of  Los 
Angeles  ? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  That  is  a  detail  that  I  have  never  heard  discussed. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Well,  it  is  a  detail  so  big — what  I  am  getting  at  is  this:  Here 
are  a  number  of  thriving  communities  south  and  east  of  Los  Angeles  that  in  and 
of  themselves  are  financially  unable,  say,  to  install  a  plant  or  to  get  any 


DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER   COLORADO    RIVER    BASIX.  103 

Allocation:  would  it  he  the  disposition  of  Los  Angeles  to  supply  these  people 
with  this  electric  energy,  you  people  having  secured  a  very  large  block  of  it? 

Mr.  CUISWELL.  It  would  lie  the  disposition  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  to  assist 
those  other  municipalities  in  any  way  that  it  could. 

Mr.  HAKER.  Would  there  he  any  disposition  to  not  supply  it? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  I  think  not. 

Mr.  KAKKR.  I  make  myself  plain  on  that,  I  hope. 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Do  you  not  think  it  ought  to  be  arranged  so  that  if.  say,  300,000 
horsepower  was  allocated  to  Los  Angeles,  because  she  could  pay  for  it  and  take 
it  and  agree  to  do  it,  that  you  should  in  turn  supply  these  smaller  communities 
on  the  line  and  within  a  reasonable  distance  from  your  main  line'.' 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  I  think,  Judge,  it  would  be  necessary  to  enter  into  some  kind 
of  an  arrangement  with  the  smaller  municipalities  themselves  for  a  general 
transmission  line  to  a  central  substation  in  the  territory  that  might  then  break 
up  the  big  voltage  and  supply  the  smaller  communities. 

Mr.  KAKKR.  That  would  in  substance  be  carrying  out  what  I  asked. 

Mr.  Cut  SWELL.  Yes.  Now,  I  might  say,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  Mr.  E.  F.  Scat- 
tergood,  the  chief  electrical  engineer  of  Los  Angeles,  who  came  here  with  us  on 
this  matter,  was  taken  ill  and  is  now  in  the  hospital,  but  I  would  like  permis- 
sion for  him  to  file  a  statement  covering  some  of  these  technical  points  after 
he  is  able  to  do  so. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Is  there  any  objection  to  that?    If  not,  that  will  be  authorized. 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  I  believe  that  is  all  I  have  to  say. 

-Mr.  BANKHEAD.  I  am  rather  surprised — I  have  not  been  out  in  that  section, 
and  I  am  rather  surprised  to  know  of  the  large  consumption  of  power — electric 
power — in  Los  Angeles.  What  are  the  main  industries  in  your  city  that  con- 
sume this  large  amount  of  power,  outside  of  your  own  municipal  plants? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  There  are  a  large  number  of  factories — perhaps  none  of  them 
so  great  in  themselves,  except  the  (Joodyear  Tire  Co..  which  takes  a  large 
block  of  power — but  I  think  the  last  census  of  the  United  States  shows  that 
the  city  of  Los  Angeles  is.  in  value  of  manufactured  products,  the  tenth  city 
in  the  United  States. 

Mr.  BANKHEAD.  Are  they  of  the  general  nature  usually  made  in  industrial 
centers? 

Mr.  CRISWKI.L.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  BARKOI-R.  And  those  industries  consume  electric  power  to  a  very  large 
extent? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  To  a  very  large  extent:  yes.  sir.  And  those  that  now  derive 
rheir  power  from  fuel  oil  would  prefer  to  change  over  to  electric  power. 

Mr.  BANK  HEAD.  How  far  is  Los  Angeles  from  Boulder  Canyon? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  About  260  miles,  approximately.  We  are  now  bringing  our 
\vater  from  240  miles  away,  so  that  we  are  not  concerned  about  bringing  electric 
energy  i_'(5i>  miles. 

Mr.  WILLIAMSON.  In  bringing  electrical  energy  from  Boulder  Canyon  to  tbe 
city  of  Los  Angeles  what  percentage  is  lost  in  transmission? 

Mi-.  CIJISWEIL.  That  is  a  technical  question  that  I  will  call  Mr.  Scattergood's 
attention  to  and  have  him  incorporate  his  answer  in  his  statement. 

Mr.  BARROVR.  The  Southern  California  Kdison  Co.  is  already  bringing  power 
into  Los  Angeles  from  as  great  a  distance,  is  it  not,  as  Boulder  Canyon? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Yes:  a  greater  distance.  The  Southern  California  Edison  Co. 
brings  power  in  from  the  P.ig  ('reek  country  up  in  the  Sierra  Nevadas.  which  is 
nearly  300  miles  away. 

Mi-.  RAKER.  Mr.  Criswell.  you  are  chairman  of  the  City  Council  of  Los 
Angeles? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Now.  I  suppose  that  with  the  water  transportation  facilities, 
the  railroad  transportation  facilities  that  now  exist,  and  the  prospective  boule- 
vards and  roads  leading  from  all  parts  of  the  West  to  Los  Angeles,  with  the 
climatic  conditions  and  the  territory  surrounding  Los  Angeles,  judging  from 
what  has  occurred,  you  expect  in  the  near  future  Los  Angeles  to  be  the  first 
city  in  the  United  States  in  manufacturing? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Now.  I  am  afraid.  Judge,  that  if  I  answered  that  question 
truthfully  as  I  see  it  I  might  be  accused  of  coming  down  here  to  boost  Los 
Angeles. 

1316— 22— PT  3 3 


104      DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN. 

Mr.  UAKER.  No;  now,  that  question  involves  this  Boulder  Canyon  construc- 
tion project,  and  it  is  a  matter  for  them  to  investigate  now  to  see  whether  or 
not  your  statement  is  true. 

Mr.  CRTS  WELL.  I  will  say  this  in.  answer  to  your  question,  that  if  we  can 
have  assurance  that  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  is  to  be  built  and  that  Los 
Angeles  will  receive  an  allocation  of  a  fair  share  of  that  power,  the  next 
census — the  next  Federal  census — will  show  not  more  than  two  cities  in  the 
United  States  larger  than  the  city  of  Los  Angeles. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  That  is.  in  population  or  in  industries? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  In  both. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Then  in  substance  you  answer  my  question  affirmatively  V 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HAKER.  And  that  ought  to  be  an  inducement  for  the  construction  of  a  dam 
like  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  What  is  the  present  population  of  Los  Angeles? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  About  715,000. 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Your  district  lies  north  of  San  Francisco,  does  it  not,  Judge 
Raker?  [Laughter.] 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Mr.  Criswell,  do  I  understand,  then,  that  your  estimate  is  that  by 
the  time  this  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  could  be  built  your  town  would  be  the 
third  city  in  the  United  States? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  If  we  can  have  the  assurance  that  we  can  supply  power  to  the 
manufacturers  who  wish  to  locate  there. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Is  there  anything  in  the  past  history  of  the  city  that  shows  a 
comparative  development  that  would  tend  to  that  that  soon? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  You  have  been  going  that  way,  have  you  ? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  The  history  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  confirms  my  statement. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  You  have  been  growing  at  that  rate? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  We  have  been  growing  at  that  rate. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  am  very  much  interested  in  your  statements  relative  to  the 
allocation  of  power.  There  appear  to  be  two  theories  on  that  subject.  One  is 
that  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  has  sought  to  obtain  all  the  power  to  be  developed 
at  Boulder  Canyon  to  the  exclusion  of  other  users,  and  that  there  will  not  be 
power  enough  to  go  around.  Then  there  is  another  theory  which  has  been 
advanced  before  this  committee,  that  all  other  power  development  on  the  Col- 
orado River  should  be  prohibited  for  fear  there  will  not  be  market  for  all  the 
power  that  can  be  developed  at  Boulder  Canyon.  Now.  which  theory  do  you 
believe  that  the  committee  should  adopt  in  that  regard? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  I  think  you  should  go  along  the  line  that  the  Boulder  Canyon 
project  should  be  built  and  the  financing  of  it  taken  care  of  before  other 
projects  are  taken  up.  That  is  simply  to  make  you  people  here  in  Washington 
feel  absolutely  safe  on  the  investment. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  But,  in  your  judgment,  there  is  no  doubt  but  what  all  the  power 
generated  at  Boulder  Canyon  will  be  promptly  used? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  I  have  no  doubt  whatever  on  that  point. 

Mr.  RAKER.  To  carry  Mr.  Hayden's  question  a  little  further,  a  market  can  be 
provided  for  it,  and  if  there  is  a  doubt  that  certain  industries  and  places  might 
use  it  all.  so  much  the  better,  but  there  is  enough  opportunity  up  the  river  to 
develop  almost  as  much  again. 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  The  river  will  develop  about  10  times  as  much.  The  firm 
horsepower  will  be  between  600.000  and  700,000  developed  there. 

Mr.  BANKHEAD.  At  Boulder  Canyon? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  At  Boulder  Canyon.  The  installation  would  probably  be  one 
million  horsepower  and  it  would  develop  about  two-thirds  of  that. 

Mr.  BANKHEAD.  Primary  power. 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  Firm  horsepower  all  the  year  round.  And  there  can  be  de- 
veloped on  the  river,  the  engineers  say.  about  6.000.000  horsepower. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So  the  development  of  Boulder  Canyon  and  the  allocation  of  the 
power  to  actual  use,  the  determination  of  construction  charges  and  interest 
would  not  deter  any  other  communities  from  future  development,  because  there 
is  plenty  of  opportunity  up  the  river  for  developing  almost  ten  times  as  much. 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  There  is.  And  in  regard  to  the  statement  that  was  made  that 
Los  Angeles  had  been  charged  with  a  desire  to  take  all  or  control  all  of  the 
power  on  the  Colorado  River,  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  has  never  at  any  time 
had  any  such  vision  in  its  mind ;  all  we  want  is  a  fair  share  of  the  power  for 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  105 

ourselves,  and  we  want  all  the  other  communities  in  the  Southwest  to  have 
allocated  to  them  all  the  power  that  they  can  use. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  How  many  people  have  you  in  Los  Angeles  now? 

Mr.  CRISWELL.  About  715.000,  according  to  our  last  school  census. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  How  many  did  you  have  10  years  ago? 

Mr.  OKI  SWELL.  Ten  years  ago — in  1910  we  had  319.000. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  in  1883  you  had  15,000. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Are  there  any  other  questions,  gentlemen?  If  not,  Mr.  Hoodenpyl, 
will  you  state  your  relation  to  the  matter  and  just  whom  you  represent? 

STATEMENT  OF  MR.  GEORGE  HOODENPYL,  CITY  ATTORNEY  OF 
LONG  BEACH,  CALIF. 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  I  am  city  attorney  of  the  city  of  Long  Beach.  Long  Beach 
is  a  city  of  some  50,000  people  according  to  the  last  census,  situated  a  little 
east  of  south  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  How  long  have  they  been  getting  that  bunch  together? 
Mr.   HOODENPYL.  In   1900  we  had  2.250  people;  in  1910  we  had  17,000;  in 
1920,  55,000. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  What  is  going  to  happen  next? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  One  hundred  thousand — probably  125,000  by  the  next  census. 
Mr.  LITTLE.  What  are  the  resources  of  that  city? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  Well,  we  have  one  particular  resource  that  most  everybody 
laughs  about  when  we  mention  it.  and  that  is  climate.  We  have  the  ocean ;  we 
have  a  wonderful  residence  section.  A  great  many  people  are  coming  to 
southern  California  for  homes  who  desire  to  live  in  the  city  of  Long  Beach 
because  it  has  a  mild  climate.  It  has  a  south  exposure  on  the  ocean  and  is 
protected  from  the  winds  by  the  Palo  Verde  Hills,  which  makes  it  one  of  the 
most  attractive,  eveu-temperatured  cities  on  the  coast. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  What  proportion  of  the  able-bodied  men  there  are 
engaged  in  some  active  work? 

Mr.  RAKER.  One  hundred  per  cent. 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  I  think  the  percentage  is  larger  than  that.  [Laughter.] 
I  will  say  very  frankly  that  we  have  a  population  of  at  least  33J  per  cent  that 
are  there  simply  to  spend  the  money  they  make  back  East,  or  have  made  back 
East,  and  I  think  !t  is  the  most  delightful  place  in  the  world  for  business  men 
who  have  made  their  fortunes  in  business. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  You  are  fishing  to  have  us  move  out  there? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  Well,  it  is  a  dangerous  proposition  to  come  out  there  unless 
you  want  to  stay.  [Laughter.] 

Mr.  LEATHERWOOD.  Is  ir  the  prediction  of  some  of  the  residents  of  Long 
Beach  that  when  the  next  census  is  taken  Los  Angeles  may  be  a  suburb  of 
Long  Beach  V 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  No,  I  think  not.  I  am  like  Mr.  Crlsswell.  I  would  not  go 
fhat  far.  but  the  city  of  Long  Beach  although  it  is  a  long  distance,  comparatively, 
from  Imperial  Valley,  is  interested  in  two  ways  in  this  proposition,  otherwise 
they  would  not  have  sent  me  here  as  a  representative  to  come  before  this  com- 
mittee and  present  what  I  could  to  aid  in  getting  the  Government  to  promptly 
improve  and  develop  the  Colorado  R'ver.  The  Imperial  Valley  is  what  we  call 
our  back  country,  our  agricultural  section,  and  in  a  general  way  the  prosperity 
of  southern  California  and  of  the  Southwest,  depends  upon  the  protection  of 
that  valley  and  the  protection  of  the  territory  in  Arizona  :  and  whatever  pro- 
tection can  he  afforded  there,  and  whatever  Improvements  can  be  made  in 
Arizona  <>r  in  Nevada,  are  a  benefit  to  the  whole  Southwest,  and  to  that  extent 
the  city  of  Long  Beach  is  indirectly  benefited  because  the  prosperity  of  that 
section  will  be  shared  in  by  the  city  of  Long  Beach  equally  with  other  cities. 
1  can  conceive  of  no  greater  calamity  eveij  to  the  city  of  Long  Beach  than  the 
destruction  of  the  Imperial  Valley  and  it  would  affect  the  whole  southwest 
in  the  same  way.  It  would  be  a  permanent  destruction  if  this  water  goes  into 
the  valley.  In  that  way  the  city  of  Long  Beach  is  interested,  and  sufficiently 
interested  to  expend  its  money  to  send  a  representative  here  to  let  you  gentle- 
men know  its  interest  in  the  matter  and  to  urge  you  to  action  along  th's  line. 
Mr.  LITTLE.  May  I  ask  the  gentleman  a  question?  Have  you  formed  any 
estimate  as  to  how  much  value  would  be  immediately  destroyed  if  that  Im- 
perial Valley  were  flooded? 

Mr.   HOODENPYL.  Well,    it    is   difficult   to   say   what   you   mean   by    immediate 
destruction.     If  an  opening  in  the  river  is  permitted  there,  as  Mr.  Bacon  said. 


106  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

and  as  the  engineers  generally  agree,  it  would  be  a  difficult  problem  to  close 
the  opening  in  the  river. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  What  I  mean  is.  if  they  did  not  close  it. 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  If  they  did  not  close  it  there  would  be  an  enor.nous  in- 
jury. The  engineers  can  give  yon  the  area,  the  exact  figures  of  what  would  bo 
flooded,  but  it  would  destroy  the  cities  of  Calexico,  Brawley,  El  Centre,  and 
Imperial.  And  I  understand  that  the  crop  reports  last  year  showed  $65,000,000 
worth  of  produce  from  that  valley  of  California. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  And  all  that  produce  would  be  destroyed,  that  $63.000,000 
worth,  would  it  not? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  Absolutely.  The  people  would  be  driven  out  of  their  homes, 
and  besides  that  all  of  the  improvements  in  the  city,  the  railroad,  and  every- 
thing else  there,  would  be  under  water. 

Mr.  UAKEK.  It  would  not  only  be  the  $65,000,000,  or  $80,000,000  a  year,  but 
it  would  be  a  permanent  destruction. 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  It  would  be  a  permanent  destruction  of  the  present  values, 
also. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  And  in  addition  to  that,  the  balance  of  the  land,  if  irrigated, 
would  be  brought  into  production  and  add  almost  as  much  as  you  are  produc- 
ing now. 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  The  limit  of  this  will  at  least  double  the  irrigable  area  in 
that  section,  not  all  of  which  would  be  under  the  sea  level,  though. 

Another  point  along  that  line  that  has  not  been  touched  upon  is  this,  that 
the  Imperial  Valley  produces  a  crop  which  is  early,  largely  cantaloupes  and 
things  like  that — berries — that  would  not  compete  with  the  general  farmers 
throughout  the  country,  and  the  urging  of  the  objection  that  there  is  enough 
land  tillable  at  the  present  time  would  not  be  effective  as  against  the  Im- 
perial Valley  because  the  products  there  are  largely  not  competitive  with 
the  balance  of  the  country. 

The  city  of  Long  Beach  is  directly  interested  in  this  proposition  of  power. 
We  believe  that  if  this  dam  is  constructed  by  the  Federal  Government,  power 
can  be  laid  down  in  southern  California  much  cheaper  than  we  get  it  now  from 
the  private  corporations.  The  industrial  section  of  the  city  of  Long  Beach  is 
just  across  the  line  from  an  industrial  section  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles.  Los 
Angeles  has  extended  its  quarters  to  the  coast.  We  are  handicapped  in  our 
efforts  to  obtain  industries  by  reason  of  this  fact :  The  city  of  Los  Angeles 
having  its  municipal  system — not  only  its  distributing  system,  but  owning  also 
its  producing  system — is  able  to  sell  electricity  across  the  line  from  the  city  of 
Long  Beach  at  5*  cents  per  kilowatt  hour — that  is  the  domestic  rate — while  the 
city  of  Long  Beach,  across  this  imaginary  line,  is  required  to  pay  to  the  private 
corporation  7.92  cents  per  kilowatt  hour.  Now,  the  ratio  of  this  rate,  this 
domestic  rate,  is  carried  out  proportionately  in  the  industrial  rates.  There 
are  no  physical  differences  between  the  territory  inside  of  the  city  of  Long 
Beach  and  the  territory  inside  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles.  We  both  have  city 
water  and  can  meet  any  competition  for  municipal  water  in  the  city  of  Long 
Beach,  but  we  can  not  meet  the  power  situation. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Explain  to  the  committee  what  is  the  matter  with  the  railroad 
commission  that  they  are  not  adjusting  this  difference. 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  The  railroad  commission  has  recently  rendered  a  decision 
reducing  the  rate  in  the  city  of  Long  Beach  from  9  cents  to  7.92  cents  per  kilo- 
watt hour.  Now.  it  is  claimed  that  under  the  investments  on  the  privately 
owned  utility,  in  order  to  give  them  a  return  of  8  per  cent,  it  is  necessary  that 
this  rate  be  maintained.  That  brings  me  to  another  reason  as  to  why  tin's 
should  be  developed  by  the  Federal  Government  instead  of  by  private  cor- 
porations to  meet  that  very  proposition. 

The  Edison  Co. — the  Southern  California  Edison  Co. — is  one  of  the  largest 
producers  of  electricity  in  the  country,  and  I  presume  it  has  as  high  a  standing 
and  can  borrow  money  as  cheaply  as* any  private  corporation  or  private  utility 
in  the  United  States.  The  railroad  commission  lias  permitted  it,  and  it  has  paid 
s  per  cent  for  money  borrowed  to  use  for  development  purposes.  Now.  it  is 
necessary  for  that  return  to  be  made.  The  Federal  Government  can  undoubtedly 
borrow  money  for  at  least  2  to  3  per  cent  less  than  any  public  utility  can  borrow 
it.  In  view  of  that,  if  the  Federal  Government  constructs  this  dam  it  will  save 
to  the  consumer,  who  must  ultimately  pay  the  cost  of  construction  and  for  all 
money  that  is  hired  to  go  into  the  project,  not  less  than  2  per  cent  on  the  invest- 
ment. Now,  that  is  one  reason  that  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  can  serve  electric 
energy  at  a  rate  less  than  the  railroad  commission  fixes  for  the  public  utilities, 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  107 

because  of  the  fact  that  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  does  not  have  to  make  that  high 
return.  At  the  time  that  the  public  utility  corporations  were  permitted  to 
borrow  money  at  8  per  cent  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  was  able  to  borrow  it  at 
6,  which  allowed  it  2  per  cent  difference  there,  and  that  contributed  to  the 
cheapness  of  the  project. 

Now,  I  think  the  Federal  Government  should  not  make  a  profit  out  of  this 
power  or  out  of  the  construction  of  this  dam ;  but  I  think  it  is  to  the  interest  of 
the  country  at  large,  and  particularly  the  interest  of  the  Southwest,  that  this 
electric  energy  be  given  to  the  people  at  cost.  The  cost  of  the  electric  energy  is 
reflected  in  all  the  manufactured  products  that  are  produced  in  that  section, 
and  it  is  reflected  in  all  the  agricultural  products,  because  it  is  necessary  for 
every  agriculturist  in  southern  California,  practically  all  of  them,  to  use  elec- 
tricity more  or  less ;  and  the  cheaper  this  is  placed  upon  the  farm  and  placed 
to  the  manufacturer,  the  cheaper  the  product  will  be,  and  therefore  the  cheaper 
will  be  the  product  to  the  public  that  is  the  ultimate  consumer. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  When  you  speak  of  furnishing  power  and  light  at 
cost,  you  moan  including,  of  course,  interest  at  44  or  5  per  cent  on  the  amount 
invested? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  RAXKHEAD.  I^et  me  ask  you  this  question  :  Conceding  that  the  Government 
could  do  that  upon  the  basis  of  the  statement  made  by  Mr.  Smith,  at  consid- 
erably less  cost  than  the  companies  that  are  now  engaged  in  that  private  in* 
<]ustry  in  thnt  section,  do  you  think  it  is  entirely  fair  to  them  to  have  Govern- 
ment competition  of  that  sort  based  upon  actual  cost  of  production,  plus  amor- 
tization of  the  plant? 

Mr  HOODEXPYT,.  Well.  I  do  not  know  any  reason  why  they  should  not  meet 
that  competition.  They  have  to  in  the  city  of  Los  Angeles,  Pasadena,  and 
Riverside. 

Mr.  BAXKHEAD.  Does  your  California  commission  figure  that  the  Government 
should  he  repaid  in  interest ;  that  that  plant  should  bear  4  or  5  per  cent  interest 
on  the  cost  of  investment? 

Mr.  HOODEXPYL.  Well,  you  could  do  that  and  still  make  it  cheaper  than  the 
cost  at  present. 

Mr.  BANKHEAD.  Then,  would  not  the  practical  effect  of  that  be  to  put  them 
out  of  business? 

Mr.  HOOUKNPYL.  Not  necessarily:  because  there  will  be.  from  our  view  of 
it.  as  Mr.  Crisswell  stated,  a  greater  demand  than  can  be  supplied.  The 
power  developed  in  Boulder  Canyon  will  not  be  sufficient  to  put  the  Edison  Co. 
out  of  business. 

Mr.  BANKHEAD.  Do  you  advocate  Government  ownership  and  operation  of 
a  utility  of  that  sort  in  competition  with  private  industry  engaged  in  the 
same  character  of  business? 

Mr.  HOODENPYI,.  Absolutely. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Especially  in  this  instance,  where  you  are  preventing 
the  destruction  of  a  great  deal  of  property  and  also  making  available  water 
for  the  reclamation  of  lands  that  now  have  no  value. 

Mr.  BAXKHEAD.  I  was  just  discussing  the  question  of  principle  on  that  par- 
ticular phase  of  it. 

Mr.  I-TOOIXEXPYT,.  This  water  belongs  to  the  people,  it  should  be  developed  by 
the  people,  and  the  people  should  have  the  benefit  of  it. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  What  is  the  investment  in  reservoirs,  dams,  ditches,  and  trans- 
mission lines  in  this  territory  south  of  the  Tehachapi.  owned  by  private  indi- 
viduals? 

Mr.  HOODKXPVL.  I  could  nol  give  you  any  estimate  on  that. 

Mr.  YEAGER.  I  can  give  you  that. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  Just  tell  us  that,  will  you? 

Mr.  YEAGER.  The  Southern  California  Edison  Co..  which  serves  im  in  the 
San  Joaquin  Valley  and  part  of  southern  California,  lias  about  *  102.500,000, 
as  valued  by  the  railroad  commission:  and  (hen  there  is  the  Southern 
Sierras,  a  much  smaller  company,  and  I  do  not  know  the  figure  on  that. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  I  suppose  it  will  run  altogether  about   $1  .",0.000,000? 

Mr.  YKAGEK.  A  little  less  than  that.  T  would  say. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  D»  you  believe  the  Government  ought  to  furnish  the  use  of  the 
Mississippi  River  for  navigation  in  competition  with  the  railroads? 

Mr.  HOOOF.NPYL.  Yes;  I  think  so.     I  think  they  are  doing  it. 

Mr.  LTTTI.K.  They  have  been  doing  it  a  long  time.  The  Colorado  is  not 
navigable  to  amount  to  anything? 


108  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  Not  for  practical  purposes. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  But  it  does  have  an  exceptional  amount  of  resource  as  a  de- 
veloper of  electric  power,  does  it  not;  more  so.  iwrhaps,  than  any  other  river  in 
the  United  States? 

Mr.   HOODKNPYL.   I  think  so. 

Mr.  Lrrn.K.  And  don't  you  think  that  you  people  who  live  under  it  have  just 
as  much  right  to  expect  the  Government  to  assist  in  developing  the  electric- 
power  and  irrigating  resources  of  it  as  the  people  along  the  Mississippi  have  to 
expect  the  Government  to  keep  up  their  means  of  navigation? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  That  is  our  view  of  it.  Furthermore.  I  do  not  think  you 
need  to  anticipate  that  there  is  going  to  he  any  destruction  or  diminution  of 
the  value  of  the  properties  of  the  public  utilities.  The  sentiment  in  southern 
California  particularly  is  to  huy  out  the  distributing  systems  of  the  various 
cities  at  a  reasonable  and  fair  price,  not  only  of  the  value  but  also  of  the 
severance  damages.  Los  Angeles  has  recently  taken  over  all  of  the  distributing 
systems  of  the  Southern  California  Edison  Co.  within  its  limits.  Pasadena  has 
done  the  same  thing,  and  Santa  Ana  has  done  the  same  thing,  and  other  cities 
are  moving  to  that  end. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  May  I  ask  you  another  question?  Suppose  that  the  development 
of  this  power  should,  by  competition  or  otherwise,  develop  a  smaller  rate  of 
profit  in  some  big  investment  companies ;  do  you  think  that  that  would  be  any 
worse  than  it  would  be  for  the  Government  to  sit  by  and  allow  the  farmers  of 
Imperial  Valley,  who  produce  865.000.000  a  year,  to  be  wrecked  and  destroyed 
entirely? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  I  do  not. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  You  think  the  farmers  down  there,  who  produce  $65.000,000 
worth  of  crops  a  year,  are  entitled  to  as  much  protection  as  the  gentlemen  who 
get  7  or  8  per  cent  on  their  present  investments,  do  you  not? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  I  think  they  are  entitled  to  equal  protection,  if  not  more. 

Mr.  HAKER.  Let  me  ask  you.  from  your  observation,  taking  that  southwestern 
territory  as  it  exists  now.  is  there  a  sufficient  electric  energy,  or  is  there  a 
general  shortage  all  over  that  country? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  There  is  a  general  shortage.  We  have  had  to  wait  for 
months  there  to  get  some  150  horsepower  for  a  manufacturing  plant  in  the  city 
of  Long  Beach. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Now.  may  I  ask  a  question  in  order  to  get  the  record  clear,  as  I 
understand  it:  and  if  I  am  wrong.  I  hope  I  will  he  corrected  by  some  of  you 
gentlemen.  Under  the  law  as  it  now  exists  the  California  Railroad  Commis- 
sion fixes  the  rates  of  fares  or  charges  for  the  furnishing  of  electric  energy  by 
the  public  utility  corporations? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  Yes.   sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  But  the  commission  has  not  the  power  to  do  so  in  the  case  of  the 
city  of  Los  Angeles:  is  that  right? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  It  has  not. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  being  the  case,  over  all  the  rest  of  the  State  except  Los 
Angeles  it  fixes  the  rate 

Mr.  JOHN  S.  NICKEKSON   (interposing).  It  has  that  i>ower. 

Mr.   RAKER.  Now? 

Mr.  NICKEKSON.   It  has  that  power  now. 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  Not  over  the  city's  plant. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  am  talking  about  the  city  plant. 

Mr.  XK  KKI:SON.  If  there  is  a  public  utility  furnishing  power  in  the  city  no\\. 
they  have  the  power  over  them. 

Mr.  RAKER.  In  other  words,  they  charge  the  same  as  the  city  fixes.  Is 
that  correct? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  I  am  not  sure  that  I  understand  you,  but  the  railroad 
commission  fixed  the  rates  in  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  as  long  as  it  was  served 
by  the  Southern  California  Edison  Co..  but  when  the  city  of  Los  Angeles 
took  over  the  distributing  system,  that  portion  of  it  that  they  did  not  take  over 
within  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  belonging  to  the  Southern  California  Edison 
<'«..  then  the  railroad  commission  lost  its  jurisdiction  of  that  that  was  owned 
and  o])eratecl  by  the  nmnicipality.  and  I  want  to  say  on  that  score  that  im- 
mediately upon  taking  over  that  system  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  reduced 
materially  the  rates  which  had  been  fixed  and  which  had  been  collected  by 
the  Edison  Co.  with  the  approval  of  the  railroad  commission. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Yon  would  not  be  in  favor  of  having  a  competing  system  that 
would  drive  out  or  absolutely  ruin  a  business  that  had  been  built  up.  that 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  109 

had  done  so  much  for  the  country  as  it  is  now,  and  that  was  regulated  by  a 
State  commission,  would  you? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  Absolutely  not.  and  1  do  not  think  there  is  any  fear  of  that. 

Mr.  BANKHEAD.  In  other  words,  you  believe  that  this  water  power  there 
is  essential  and  profitable  to  the  people,  and  that  the  Government  should 
use  it  so  that  the  people  at  large  will  derive  the  greatest  amount  of  benefit 
from  its  use. 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  That  is  my  view. 

Mr.  RANKHEAD.  I  think  you  are  entirely  right,  sir. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Gentlemen,  it  is  12  o'clock.  I  presume  we  will  be  called  to  the 
lioor  of  the  House  very  soon.  My  understanding  is  that  to-morrow  is  the 
regular  meeting  day  and  we  will  meet  to-morrow  morning  at  10.30.  If  you 
have  anything  more  to  add  I  wish  you  would  be  here  to-morrow,  Mr.  Hoodenpyl. 
Do  you  want  to  add  a  few  words  now? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  I  just  wanted  to  add  a  few  words.  This  is  on  the  matter 
of  the  suggestion  of  one  apparent  objection  to  this  proposition  of  going  ahead 
immediately,  and  that  is  on  the  question  of  the  allocation  of  power  and  the 
allocation  of  water  rights  and  priority  use  and  such  as  that. 

Now,  then,  this  objection  is  met.  absolutely  and  unequivocally  and  com- 
pletely, if  the  engineers  are  correct  that  there  is  sufficient  water  to  serve  all 
of  the  lands  irrigable  by  the  river.  In  other  words,  it  is  immaterial  what  alloca- 
tion of  power  is  made  as  between  the  States,  if  there  is  sufficient  water.  That 
is  the  engineering  answer. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  You  have  the  same  information  from  your  engineers  as  to  the 
final  resources  of  the  river  that  Mr.  Criswell  had,  have  you? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  The  same  that  Mr.  Criswell  had.  Now,  I  want  to  add  this 
further  thought:  This  power  compact  commission 'has,  I  understand,  until  the 
1st,  of  January  to  make  its  agreement.  If  it  does  not  agree  by  that  date  and 
make  its  report,  it  is  dissolved.  If  it  does  make  an  agreement  and  report  by 
that  date  that  will  have  to  go  to  the  various  States  and  be  ratified  by  the  legis- 
latures, and  by  Congress,  and  that  will  take  considerable  time. 

And  as  Mr.  Hoover  said  yesterday,  this  matter  should  go  ahead  immediately. 
When  that  commission  makes  a  report — and  evidently  it  will  make  a  report  dur- 
ing the  year — if  that  report  is  approved  it  can  be  written  into  the  distribution 
of  this  water  and  the  distribution  of  this  power,  pending  the  construction  of  this 
dam  and  this  project;  and  it  should  not  be  delayed  on  that  account;  because 
there  will  be  no  distribution  of  the  power,  and  no  distribution  of  the  water, 
until  plenty  of  time  shall  have  elapsed  to  permit  of  the  adjustment  of  questions 
involving  the  allocation  of  power  and  water,  or  the  determination  not  to 
allocate  them ;  and  then  it  will  be  up  to  the  Federal  Government  to  proceed. 

\o\v.  just  one  other  thought  on  that  question  and  I  am  through :  I  do  not 
believe  under  the  law  any  water  is  turned  to  beneficial  use.  or  that  any  prior 
right  to  the  power  is  established  by  the  construction  of  this  dam.  for  this 
reason:  Whatever  prior  right  is  established  would  rest  in  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment, and  not  in  any  individual  nor  in  any  property,  nor  would  it  become  vested 
in  any  way,  except  that  it  would  lodge  in  the  Federal  Government  ;  and  all 
the  States  should  have  confidence  in  the  Federal  Government  as  to  the  proper 
distribution  of  that  power  and  the  proper  distribution  of  that  water,  and  to 
protect  both  the  upstream  and  the  lower  stream. 

Just  one  illustration  to  make  that  clear:  There  are  500.000  acres  of  land  in 
southern  California  and  southern  Arizona  that  could  be  irrigated.  The  Gov- 
ernment builds  this  dam.  but  the  right  of  that  land  to  the  water  will  not  become 
affixed  and  there  will  be  no  appropriation  until  the  Federal  Government 
permits  the  water  to  go  upon  the  land.  And  that  is  equivalent  to  saying  this: 
Suppose  there  are  100.000  acres  of  land  in  southern  California  that  is  irrigable 
by  this  dam,  and  the  Government  says  there  is  not  sufficient  water  for  that  land 
and  the  Government  does  not  issue  a  permit  for  the  water  to  go  over  it.  Von 
can  not  say  tinder  those  circumstances  that  the  water  right  attached  to  that 
land,  when  the  Government  never  permitted  that  water  to  go  there. 

And  that  argues,  to  my  mind,  that  there  will  be  no  attachment  of  a  prior 
right  until  the  water  is  permitted  by  the  Government  to  go  on  the  particular 
piece  of  land. 

I  call  your  attention  to  that  particularly,  owing  to  the  urgency  of  this  matter, 
and  I  hope  that  this  matter  will  not  be  delayed  indefinitely  to  wait  for  a 
decision  of  the  commission,  or  of  the  States  pursuant  to  the  decision  of  the 
commission,  or  in  the  event  that  there  is  no  decision  until  the  time  expires. 


110      DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  Before  you  get  through  I  would  like  to  have  you  discuss  this 
question,  or  to  have  some  one  else  discuss  it  during  the  hearings:  Do  you 
think  that  the  thing  should  be  left  up  in  the  air.  and  that  every  legal  step 
should  not  be  taken  to  secure  the  Government's  permanent  right  in  this  water, 
so  that  when  it  built  the  dam  it  would  know  definitely  what  its  rights  were? 

Mr.    HOODKNI-YL.  The    Government    would    have    the    permanent    right. 

Mr  RAKER.  But  I  do  not  think  you  people  believe  that  it  should  all  be  left 
in  the  air.  but  that  there  should  be  steps  taken  so  that  the  Government  will 
know  exactly  what  its  rights  arc. 

Mr.  HOOUKNPYL.  That  is  true  when  this  thing  is  concluded.  But  unless  y.-u 
h'nd  some  reason  whereby  the  construction  of  this  dam  will  violate  a  possible 
right — and  I  think  it  docs  not  violate  any  possible  right — I  think  you  should 
proceed  to  the  construction  of  it. 

Mr.  SWING.  Your  point  is  that  the  walls  of  the  place  where  the  dam  is  to  be 
built,  being  2.000  feet  high,  there  could  be  no  diversicn  at  the  dam?  After 
the  dam  is  completed,  there  will  subsequently  be  installed  in  the  river  below 
at  some  point  the  necessary  works  for  the  diversion  cf  the  water  on  the  Cali- 
fornia side  or  on  the  Arizona  side,  and  that  the  diversion  is  the  initial  step 
for  the  acquiring  of  the  water  right? 

Mr.  HOODENPYL.  Yes:  that  would  be  the  actual  step.  But  I  think  whenever 
the  Government  issued  a  permit  for  that  diversion,  that  that  would  fix  the 
right  as  to  the  land  covered  by  the  permit ;  and  if  there  are  100.000  acres  there 
as  to  which  the  Government  does  not  issue  a  permit,  there  can  be  no  right. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Well.  I  think  there  is  something  wrong  in  that  theory,  because 
there  is  nothing  to  give  a  right  there;  when  you  build  the  dam  there  and  held 
back  the  Hood  waters,  you  have  got  something  for  the  Government:  now.  I 
think  you  should  hold  that  down  legally,  so  that  you  have  not  only  the  dam 
and  the  water  under  it.  but  have  the  right  to  go  up  the  stream  and  control 
that  water.  The  Government  should  have  the  same  right  as  an  individual 
or  corporation  if  it  puts  in  the  dam  and  stores  the  flood  waters. 

Mr.  SMITH.  Well,  as  this  is  to  be  constructed  on  the  public  domain,  the  Gov- 
ernment will  have  absolute  control  of  it:  no  private  individual  can  acquire 
any  rights  without  the  consent  of  the  Government. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  I  am  not  discussing  that.  I  am  saying  that  the  Government 
ought  to  be  protected  in  its  rights. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  I  do  not  see  any  real  disagreement  between  you  and  Mr. 
Hoodenpyl  in  this  matter. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Possibly  there  is  not.  but  I  am  strong  in  protecting  the  Govern- 
ment when  it  expends  the  peoples'  money  on  enterprises  like  this,  just  as 
it  has  been  done  on  all  the  Government  reclamation  projects. 

(Thereupon,  at  12.05  p.  m..  the  committee  adjourned  until  Friday.  June  24. 
1022.  at  10.30  o'clock  a.  m.) 


C'OMMITTKE  OX  IRRIGATION  OF  AKII)  L.\M)S. 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVE. 

rriil'iit.  .lunr  .?.?.  J!)22. 

The  committee  met  at  10.30  o'clock  a.  in..  Hon.  Nicholas  J.  Sinnott  (acting 
chairman)  presiding. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  We  will  now  hear  Senator  Evans,  the  mayor  of  Riverside. 
Calif. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  S.  C.  EVANS,  MAYOR  OF  RIVERSIDE,  CALIF. 

Mr.  KVANS.  Mr.  Chairman.  I  will  be  very  brief,  because  I  want  Mr.  Xicker- 
soii.  of  the  Imperial  Valley,  to  have  as  much  time  as  possible.  I  was  sent  here 
by  the  mayor  and  council  of  Riverside  and  the  county  supervisors  to  represent 
them  in  this  matter.  I  went  to  California  in  1876.  I  do  not  pose  as  an  ex- 
pert, but  my  life  has  been  spent  on  problems  of  this  kind — that  is.  in  endeavor- 
ing to  prevent  our  lands  from  overflowing  along  the  Santa  Anna  River  and 
other  streams  in  California  and  in  the  development  of  land  and  the  placing  of 
settlers  thereon.  A  short  time  ago  we  had  a  very  serious  flood  in  the  Palo 
Verde  Valley,  which  is  shown  on  this  map  you  have,  I  believe.  I  would  like 
to  leave  these  photographs  with  you  to  show  you  the  seriousness  of  that  flood. 

I  went  down  at  the  request  of  the  county  supervisors  and  the  Riverside  city 
council,  and  we  were  there  three  or  four  days  forming  a  Red  Cross  organiza- 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  Ill 

tion  that  took  charge  of  anywhere  from  40  to  75  families,  about  30,000  acres  of 
land  having  been  overflowed  and  about  2.000  crops  having  been  destroyed. 
I  want  to  tell  you  that  it  would  make  your  heart  ache  to  see  those  families 
huddled  up  there  on  the  damp  ground  and  little  children  without  anything  to 
eat,  without  a  blanket  or  anything  at  all.  They  had  to  get  off  in  rowboats.  on 
planks,  and  in  every  other  old  way  in  order  to  get  out  at  all.  You  can  imagine 
what  a  distressing  thing  it  was. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Where  does  that  appear  on  this  map? 

Mr.  EVANS.  That  is  the  Palo  Verde  Valley,  right  at  Blythe.  The  town  of 
Ripley.  shown  on  these  pictures,  was  entirely  under  water,  including  a  $200,000 
hotel.  The  water  was  standing  about  4  feet  on  the  lower  floor  of  the  hotel. 
The  Hood  came  so  quick,  and  they  usually  come  quick,  that  the  people  did  not 
have  any  time  at  all  to  even  take  the  chickens  out.  or  rheir  clothing.  They 
had  to  practically  run  for  it.  As  I  see  it.  this  problem  is  an  emergency  one. 
I  have  been  familiar  with  the  Imperial  Valley  since  its  development  first 
started.  I  went  down  there  first  with  a  team  of  horses  before  there  was  any- 
thing in  the  Imperial  Valley,  before  there  was  even  a  road  run.  and  I  have 
seen  every  one  of  those  towns  start  up  and  grow.  I  have  been  across  thte 
Mexican  border — about  60  miles  below  the  border — and  have  seen  those  other 
lands  that  belong  to  the  people  in  Mexico. 

There  is  no  question  at  all  about  the  tremendous  urgency  of  this  matter. 
As  has  already  been  stated  to  you,  if  that  valley  tills,  of  course  it  absolutely 
no  outlet.  I  saw  it  when  the  river  broke  over  into  the  Salton  Sea.  Many 
Riverside  people  went  down  there  to  look  at  it.  It  looked  as  though  the  South- 
ern Pacific  Railroad  tracks  would  be  entirely  destroyed.  When  I  first  went 
there,  there  was  no  transcontinental  Southern  Pacific  Railroad  through  that 
section.  When  this  flood  broke  through,  in  1905  or  1906.  or  after  that  flood, 
the  track  was  moved  farther  up  the  hill.  It  has  been  moved  farther  upon  the 
hill  each  time  there  has  been  a  flood.  The  flood  continued  to  come  in  and, 
of  course,  that  meant  that  the  land  was  damp,  which  made  the  problem  more 
difficult,  and  it  would  not  take  much  more  to  absolutely  destroy  that  valley. 
My  county  is  so  intimately  interested  in  the  Imperial  Valley  that  it  is  hard 
to  talk  of  anything  concerning  one  without  talking  about  the  other.  The  State 
highway  authorities  of  our  State  are  building  a  concrete  road  clear  through 
the  eastern  end  of  Riverside  County  into  Imperial  County  and  clear  down  to 
the  Mexican  border.  There  are  many  communities  in  our  county,  including 
Coachella,  Mecca.  Thermal,  and  Blythe.  that  have  the  same  nature  of  soil  as 
that  in  the  Imperial  Valley,  and  hundreds  of  our  farmers  are  financially  inter- 
ested in  this  matter  in  a  great  many  ways.  They  raise  in  that  soil  a  product 
that  is  not  raised  at  any  other  place.  In  Riverside  County,  in  the  higher  lands, 
where  the  cost  of  water  is  considerable,  we  can  raise  crops  like  lemons,  oranges, 
and  other  citrus  fruits,  because  those  are  crops  that  will  stand  that  cost  of 
water.  On  this  lainl  where  only  trees  grow,  you  find  very  few  dairies. 

The  operations  are  almost  altogether  handled  by  tractors.  In  this  other 
class  of  land  you  find  large  dairies,  with  horses,  cattle,  sheep,  hogs,  and  all 
kinds  of  animals.  Dean  Hunt,  of  the  University  of  California,  has  traveled 
tip  and  down  that  section  of  the  State  calling  attention  to  the  importance  to 
our  agriculture  of  the  development  of  dairies  and  the  absolute  necessity  for 
an  increase  of  animal  husbandry  in  our  part  of  the  State  if  our  agriculture  is 
to  endure.  He  made  a  very  startling  statement  not  long  ago  when  he  said  that 
the  people  of  Riverside  County  could  afford  to  pull  up  a  whole  lot  of  orange 
trees  and  other  citrus  fruit  trees  and  put  in  alfalfa  and  other  vegetable  crops. 
if  ny  doing  so  they  could  encourage  the  dairy  industry,  because  that  would 
give  them  proper  fertilizer  in  the  growing  of  citrus  fruits. 

Mr.  RAKER.  The  dairy  industry  in  the  Imperial  Valley  would  have  to  he  on 
land  that  is  not  now  irrigated? 

Mr.  EVANS.  Yes.  sir;  those  are  the  only  lands  that  would  appeal  to  those 
people  who  would  like  to  go  into  that  industry.  Of  course,  some  citrus  fruits 
are  raised  down  there,  but  they  are  not  anything  like  what  they  have  in  other 
counties  where  they  raise  them  on  higher  land.  There  are  some  very  tine  and 
excellent  fruit  grown,  hut  it  is  mainly  devoted  to  general  farming,  on  account 
of  the  peculiar  soil  conditions  and  the  ease  with  which  it  is-  cultivated,  to- 
gether with  the  relative  cheapness  of  the  water. 

Mr.  SMITH.  Are  there  not  a  great  many  cantaloupes  raised  in  the  Imperial 
Valley? 

Mr.  EVANS.  Yes.  sir:  there  are  a  great  many  cantaloupes,  cotton,  and  onions 
grown.  It  is  the  only  place,  with  the  exception  of  a  very  limited  area  in  River- 


112  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

side  County,  where  dates  are  successfully  raised.  It  might  interest  you  to  say 
that  I  have  seen  date  trees,  larger  than  those  round  columns  on  the  Capitol 
transported  successfully  from  one  place  to  another. 

Now,  let  me  say  that  Riverside  is  a  city  of  about  22,000  population,  and  that 
valley  is  something  like  the  rest  of  that  country.  Twenty  years  or  more  ago 
we  started  our  municipal  electric  lighting  system.  We  buy  power  from  the 
Southern  California  Edison  Co.  and  some  from  the  Southern  Sierras  Co..  generat- 
ing a  small  portion  of  it  ourselves.  We  are  municipal  ownership  people,  as  are 
most  of  the  people  in  that  section  of  the  country,  including  Los  Angeles.  Long- 
beach,  San  Bernardino,  and  other  places.  I  try  in  a  small  way.  to  run  some 
pumping  plants,  and  there  is  a  large  number  of  people  about  my  size  that  run 
two,  three,  four,  or  five  sets  of  pumping  plants.  Personally,  I  run  four.  I  run 
three  of  those  plants  on  power  procured  from  the  city  of  Riverside,  and  the 
fourth  one  I  am  not  able  to  attach  electricity  to,  because  only  an  outside  com- 
pany could  serve  it,  and  I  can  not  get  a  rate  from  them  that  would  justify  me 
in  attaching  electricity  to  it.  I  think  it  is  a  fair  question,  and  you  have  indi- 
cated that  in  some  of  the  questions  you  have  asked  the  others,  why  this  lower 
rate  can  be  given  by  our  city:  Public  utility  companies  are  supposed  to  pay 
all  of  the  State  expense.  We  have  an  ad  valorem  tax  for  county  and  municipal 
purposes,  and,  of  course,  with  them  paying  a  State  tax  and  our  municipal  plant 
not  paying  any  is,  perhaps,  one  reason  why  they,  in  justice  to  themselves,  must 
be  allowed  a  little  higher  rate  than  we  are  allowed. 
.Mr.  SMITH.  What  do  you  mean  by  an  ad  valorem  duty? 

Mr.  EVANS.  We  are  assessed  and  taxed  on  an  ad  valorem  basis.  They  are 
allowed  their  rate  by  the  State  railroad  commission.  We  believe  in  regulating 
public  utilities. 

1  think  that  is  about  all  I  care  to  say,  other  than  this:  I  never  have  heard  a 
word  uttered  in  southern  California,  and  I  go  around  a  good  deal,  indicating  any 
desire  on  the  part  of  Los  Angeles  or  any  particular  city  or  locality  to  get  more 
than  its  due  portion  of  this  water  or  power.  We  realize  that  primarily  this  is 
for  flood  control,  and  I  think  we  realize  the  great  urgency  of  the  situation 
there.  It  would  really  be  a  catastrophe  if  Imperial  Valley  were  obliterated, 
and  that  is  what  it  would  mean  if  the  river  broke  over,  as  it  intends  to  some 
day,  unless  something  is  done  to  prevent  it. 

Mr.  SMITH.  You  said  that  your  city  of  Riverside  and  other  cities  in  southern 
California  would  be  willing  to  come  in  on  the  same  basis  as  Los  Angeles  toward 
the  reimbursement  of  the  Government  for  the  most  of  the  proposed  project. 

Mr.  EVANS.  So  far  as  I  have  heard,  our  people  express  themselves;  yes,  sir. 
Of  course  we  are  not  in  as  favorable  a  position 'as  the  city  of  Los  Angeles.  Los 
Angeles  is  in  a  unique  position.  In  population  and  assessed  values  Los  Angeles 
exceeds  all  of  these  other  places.  In  its  total  assessed  value  it  exceeds  a  num- 
ber of  the  Eastern  States  or  a  number  of  the  Middle  ?]astern  States.  If  you 
have  a  visual  presentation  of  it.  you  will  realize  that  it  is  really  wonderful  how 
that  section  of  the  country  has  grown.  Of  course  we  would  be  bound  by  the 
laws,  rules,  and  regulations  that  would  govern  in  this  matter.  Certain  towns 
in  that  section,  like  Riverside,  Santa  Ana.  San  Bernardino,  and  places  of  that 
size,  would  get  together  and  figure  out  their  fair  proportion  of  this  power. 
I  have  attended  some  of  those  meetings  in  Arizona  and  several  in  Los  Angeles, 
and  I  have  never  heard  anyone  voice  the  thought  that  any  one  of  the  cities 
along  the  Colorado  River  would  have  more  than  its  fair  proportion  of  this 
power. 

We  realize  that  this  is  a  tremendously  big  thing,  and  we  feel  that  the  United 
States  Government  is  the  only  power  or  the  only  agency  to  build  it.  Now,  this 
Government  is  yours  and  mine,  and  if  we  have  not  faith  in  its  justice  and 
ability  to  work  these  things  out.  where  in  the  world  can  we  go  to  have  anything 
done  on  a  big  scale?  It  is  too  tremendously  big  for  us  to  undertake  it  locally, 
and  we  want  you  people  in  your  wisdom  to  take  it  up.  As  to  the  details  of  the 
laws  you  will  enact  for  the  future  development  of  the  Colorado  River,  all  of 
our  people  are  perfectly  willing  to  leave  that  to  Congress.  All  that  we  want 
is  a  fair  distribution  of  the  water  and  power,  upon  such  terms  as  will  in  time 
take  care  of  this  whole  expense  with  a  reasonable  rate  of  interest  upon  the  cost. 
We  are  perfectly  willing  in  our  section  of  the  country  to  do  that.  I  have  never 
heard  anybody  say  anything  to  the  contrary- 
Mr.  WILLIAMSON.  About  what  is  the  total  population  of  those  smaller  cities 
that  you  have  mentioned? 

Mr.  EVANS.  They  are  all  about  the  size  of  Riverside.  They  are  cities  of 
about  from  twelve,  fifteen,  eighteen,  twenty,  or  twenty -two  thousand  people. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN.  113 

Mr.  WIIJUAMSON.  Are  they  growing  rapidly V 

Mr.  EVANS.  All  of  them  are  growing  rapidly.  You  have  no  idea  how  those 
concrete  roads  are  building  up  the  cities.  Those  roads  are  drawing  the  towns 
right  together.  I  remember  that  I  went  through  what  is  now  Longheach  years 
ago  in  a  farm  wagon,  and  I  camped  there  right  on  the  sand,  where  the  town  is 
now  located.  There  was  absolutely  nothing  there  then,  and  I  am  still  a  com- 
paratively young  man.  I  have  seen  Los  Angeles  grow  from  a  very  few  thou- 
sand population  to  nearly  80O.IMM)  population.  I  want  to  tell  you  gentlemen  that 
you  do  not  realize  what  the  climate,  the  roads,  and  the  boosting  spirit  of  south- 
ern California  can  accomplish.  You  can  not  realize  the  absolute  money-making 
possibilities,  both  in  industrv  and  agriculture,  that  are  being  built  up  there. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.   Is  it  due  to  the  climate  or  the  soil? 

Mr.  EVANS.  It  is  both  the  climate  and  the  soil,  and  it  is  the  everlasting  stick- 
at-it-iveness  of  the  people,  and  their  go-get-it  spirit.  They  go  out  after  those 
things,  and  they  certainly  get  them.  Primarily  I  am  an  agriculturist,  and  I 
look  upon  the  agricultural  side  of  it  more  than  upon  the  industrial  side  of  it, 
because  that  has  been  my  life  work. 

Mr.  SMITH.  The  great  success  of  that  country  down  there  is  largely  due  to 
the  enthusiastic  spirit  of  the  people. 

Mr.  EVANS.  Y'es.  sir :  we  are  all  of  one  mind  down  there. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  say  that  you  went  to  California  in  1876,  and  are  still  com- 
paratively young.  I  went  there  in  1873.  and  I  consider  myself  a  kid.  Four  or 
five  months  ago  There  was  some  propaganda  started  by  various  cities  in  south- 
e'rn  California  with  regard  to  the  power  situation,  and  they  sent  us  clippings 
in  regard  to  it. 

Mr.  EVANS  .   v,.s.  sir. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  That  was  in  regard  to  Los  Angeles  getting  the  Colorado  River? 

Mr.  EVANS.   Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  That  has  all  been  adjusted  now? 

Mr.  EVANS.  Yes.  sir:  it  has  been  adjusted  very  nicely.  Naturally.  I  might 
say.  the  people  of  the  small  communities  have  had  some  suspicion  in  regard  to 
these  things,  and  there  has  been  some  feeling  against  the  great  centers  of 
population,  with  their  financial  ability  and  quickness  of  action  in  taking  hold 
of  things.  Naturally,  the  common  people  in  these  smaller  communities  be- 
came  suspicious,  and  a  lot  of  small  papers  came  out  with  those  statements. 
However,  that  has  been  adjusted  at  several  public  meetings. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  I  suppose  that  your  statement,  so  far  as  Riverside  is  concerned, 
would  apply  as  well  to  the  other  towns  you  have  referred  to  outside  of  River- 
side'/ 

Mr.   EVANS.   Yes.   sir. 

Mr.  UAKKR.  You  would  like  to  see  it  allocated  among  all  of  those  cities,  so 
that,  if  the  (iovernment  should  put  in  a  main  transmission  line,  all  of  them 
could  have  an  opportunity  to  use  this  power  at  such  a  price  as  would  pay 
back  the  original  investment,  with  a  reasonable  rate  of  interest'/ 

Mr.  EVANS.  Yes.  sir.  I  was  at  a  meeting  at  Santa  Ana.  in  which  the  mayors 
of  about  10  of  those  cities  took  part,  and  they  all  gave  voice  to  the  same 
sentiment. 

Mr.  RAKKI:.  I  understand  that  Santa  Ana.  Orange,  and  some  other  of  those 
cities  are  short  of  power  now? 

Mr.    EVANS.   Yes.    sir. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  And  the  development  of  this  Moulder  Canyon  Dam.  with  its 
600.(MMI  horsepower,  would  not  in  any  way  interfere  with  the  general  develop- 
ment there  now'/ 

Mr.    EVANS.   No.    sir. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  There  would  be  sufficient  use  for  the  power  now  generated,  as 
well  as  for  that  which  might  be  generated  by  the  Boulder  Caiiyan  I>am'/ 

Mr.  EVANS.   Yes.  sir:  I  do  not  know  where  else  they  could  go  to  get  it. 

Mr.  WIIXIAMSON.  As  to  those  smaller  towns,  would  they  have  to  have  the 
current  distributed  by  Los  Angeles,  or  would  they  be  able  to  cooperate  and 
build  some  central  distributing  station  of  their  own  so  as  to  distribute  the 
electric  current'/ 

Mr.  EVANS.  That  is  a  detail,  and  I  do  not  know  whether  Los  Angeles  would 
build  a  distributing  system  from  which  those  towns  would  take  current,  or 
whether  we  would  have  to  provide  for  the  distribution  ourselves.  In  Cali- 
fornia we  have  been  up  against  this  proposition  before,  and  when  we  did  not 
have  a  law  to  meet  the  emergency  we  went  to  the  State  legislature  and  had 
them  to  make  one.  We  will  come  throuirh  on  this  proposition  ]\\  some  means, 
and  we  will  pay  this  bill. 


114  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASTX. 

Mr.  WILLIAMSON.  You  have  no  doubt  that  you  will  secure  cooperation,  so 
that  this  current  will  he  taken  care  of  and  used? 

Mr.  EVANS.  I  have  no  doubt  about  it,  for  the  reason  that  we  have  practically 
reached  the  limit  in  that  direction  now.  If  we  do  not  secure  this,  we  have 
practically  reached  the  limit  of  our  growth. 

Mr.  KAKKK.  Your  view  is  this,  that  your  people  would  arrange  at  an  early 
date  so  as  to  be  able  to  assure  the  authorities  before  the  money  was  expended 
that  you  would  be  on  hand  to  use  the  power  as  soon  as  it  was  ready  for  de- 
livery. 

Mr.  EVANS.  We  will  either  do  that,  or  let  Los  Angeles  take  all  of  it. 

Mr.  KAKKK.  I  suppose  you  would  all  get  together  and  pi>t  in  a  main  transmN- 
sion  line  and  have  a  main  distribution  point.  Otherwise,  it  would  be  almost 
criminal  negligence  or  destruction  of  property,  because  one  main  distribution 
line  would  serve  the  purpose. 

Mr.  EVANS.  Yes.  sir. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  W.  J.  CARE,,  PASADENA,  CALIF. 

Mr.  CAKK.  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen  of  the  committee,  I  represent  th*> 
city  of  Pasadena.  I  live  at  Pasadena,  and  am  a  practicing  attorney  in  the 
city  of  Los  Angeles.  I  am  not  a  city  official,  but  I  am  employed  by  the  city  of 
Pasadena  to  come  here  and  state  its  [position  in  regard  to  this  matter.  Pasa- 
dena, of  course,  like  all  the  cities  of  southern  California,  is  tremendously  in- 
terested in  the  Imperial  Valley  problem  and  menace.  We  feel  there  that 
whatever  hurts  the  Imperial  Valley  will  hurt  us,  and  that  whatever  helps  the 
Imperial  Valley  will  help  us.  AYe  are  very  much  impressed  with  the  appealing 
character  of  this  project.  We  are  directly  interested  in  the  power  end  of  it. 
The  city  of  Pasadena,  like  the  city  of  Riverside,  has  had  its  own  municipal 
lighting  system  for  a  great  many  years.  It  has  its  own  generating  plant,  and 
it  has  a  complete  distributing  system.  I  might  say  that  the  city  of  Pasadena 
has  perhaps,  50,000  inhabitants.  At  the  present  time  Pasadena  buys  its  power 
at  wholesale,  and  it  finds  it  much  more  advantageous  to  do  that.  For  the  part 
obtained  from  the  city  of  Los  Angeles,  under  an  old  contract  which  is  very  ad- 
vantageous, they  pay  0.06  cent  per  kilowatt  hour,  and  for  the  part  ir  obtains 
from  a  private  company  it  pays  a  price  about  twice  that. 

The  city  of  Pasadena,  looking  toward  the  future  and  endeavoring  to  pro- 
vide for  its  future  wants,  desires  a  more  permanent  power  supply  for  its  needs. 
Pasadena  has  a  large  bonding  capac'ty.  It  is  extremely  anxious  to  participate 
in  this  project,  and  will  he  glad  to  take  such  power  as  may  be  fairly  allotted  to 
it.  I  think  we  can  act  more  promptly  in  a  financial  way  than  any  ordinary 
private  corporation.  The  people  of  Pasadena  have  always  voted  bonds  by  very 
large  majorities  for  anything  that  was  necessary  for  the  extension  or  develop- 
ment of  its  lighting  system,  and  none  of  the  propositions  that  have  ever  been 
put  up  to  the  people  have  been  as  attractive  as  this  would  be.  having  in  mind 
the  very  low  cost  at  which  we  could  secure  power.  I  agree  with  Senator  Evans 
as  to  tin1  sp'rit  of  cooperation  among  the  cities.  There  has  been  a  great  deal 
of  talk  about  how  the  matter  would  be  handled,  and  the  consensus  of  opinion 
lias  been  that,  perhaps,  cities  like  Los  Angeles  and  Riverside,  which  are  pre- 
pared to  take  it  a  little  more  rapidly  than  the  other  cities,  and  which  are 
financially  in  a  stronger  position,  would  take  the  lead.  I  am  sure,  however, 
that  they  will  be  very  glad  to  reserve  any  benefit  to  the  other  cities  that  is 
fair  and  proper,  and  I  believe  that  it  would  be  a  good  suggestion  to  provide 
that  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  may  attach  proper  conditions  to  any  permirs 
issued,  so  that  they  would  have  to  allot  it  fairly. 

Mr.  KAKKK.  Is  it  your  view  that  if  the  Government  should  build  Hie  Houlder 
Canon  Dam  ar  a  cost  of  about  $40.000,000.  and.  in  addition,  distributing  lines, 
or  a  main  distributing  line  for  a  certain  distance,  to  cost  another  considerable 
sum.  it  should  be  repaid  for  the  full  amount  of  the  construction  charge  and 
for  the  maintenance  and  upkeep  cost,  with  a  reasonable  rate  of  interest  upon 
the  outlay  from  the  time  the  work  began? 

Mr.  CAKH.  Yes.  sir:    I   do  not  see  any   reason  why   that  should   nor  be  done. 

Mr.  KAKKR.  Do  you  think  that  your  people  would  be  willing  to  meet  those 
conditions? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes,  sir:  we  are  ready  to  do  business  upon  the  same  basis  that 
private  companies  are.  and  pay  interest  during  the  construction  period.  That 
would  be  perfectly  satisfactory. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  that  would  be  satisfactory  to  the  people  of  Riverside? 

Mr.  EVANS.  Yes,  sir. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF    LOWER   COLORADO    RIVER    HAS IX.  115 

Mr.  RAKER.  Do  you  think  that  is  about  the  attitude  of  the  people  of  Southern 
California  generally? 

Mr.  CAKR.  Yes.  sir;  I  think  so.  The  power  would  be  so  cheap  that  they  could 
well  afford  to  do  it.  I  do  not  think  you  will  have  a  bit  of  difficulty  in  disposing 
of  the  power,  and  I  think  there  will  be  quite  acute  competition  to  secure  it. 
We  might  need  to  see  that  the  rules  governing  the  distribution  of  the  power 
are  fair,  so  that  every  section  may  have  a  fair  chance. 

Mr.  KAKKK.  Leaving  out  for  the  present  any  question  of  benefits  in  the  way 
of  flood  control  or  in  the  way  of  irrigation,  and  looking  at  it  solely  from  the 
point  of  view  of  generating  electric  power  at  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam.  your  view 
is  that  the  entire  600,000  horsepower  that  can  be  generated  by  this  dam  would 
be  readily  taken  up  by  the  people  of  Southern  California,  and  you  think  that 
they  would  be  willing — as  they  must  be,  of  course — to  allocate  it  among  the 
cities  in  an  equitable  way? 
Mr.  CAKR.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  that,  as  a  matter  of  power  alone,  you  people  would  be 
willing  to  build  the  dam,  but  you  have  not  the  ready  money  and  can  not  arrange 
<m  organization  to  do  it.  and,  therefore,  you  think  that  the  Government  should 
do  it  for  the  reasons  named,  and  that  the  Government  should  get  back  within  a 
reasonable  time  the  money  invested,  with  a  reasonable  rate  of  interest. 
Mr.  CARR.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  that  it  would  at  the  same  time  maintain  a  perpetual  bar 
against  floods,  and  also  provide  a  supply  of  water  for  2,000,000  acres  of  land? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  will  answer  that  question  yes,  with  one  exception,  and  that  is 
that  the  cities  of  Southern  California  are  financially  able  and  would  be  glad 
to  build  the  dam  if  it  were  proper  to  do  so.  I  do  not  think  it  would  be  proper. 
There  are  too  many  conflicting  interests.  There  will  be  conflicts  as  between 
the  users  of  water  and  power,  there  being  also  involved  the  question  of  flood 
control  and  irrigation.  I  think  that  such  conflicts  would  arise,  and  that  it 
would  be  inadvisable  to  allow  any  city.  State,  or  private  corporation  to  build 
the  dam.  I  think  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States  is  the  only  agency 
that  can  properly  do  it,  having  in  mind  the  general  public  interest. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  did  not  quite  intend  by  the  expression  I  used  to  mean  able 
in  that  sense,  but  I  meant  able  by  virtute  of  .the  legal  complications  that  might 
arisi.  and  if  the  Government  built  it  it  would  be  in  shape  to  allocate  the  power 
to  those  people  who  are  financially  able,  ready,  and  anxious  to  buy  the  power 
and  pay  the  price  for  it. 

Mr.  CAUK.  They  are  tremendously  anxious  to  get  a  fair  share  of  that  power, 
and  I  would  answer  your  question  yes.  with  the  qualifications  I  have  made. 

Mr.  HAYUEX.  I  have  a  letter  from  the  State  water  commissioner  of  the  State 
of  Arizona,  who  objects  to  section  5  of  this  bill  for  somewhat  the  same  reason 
you  have  given.  Mr.  Norvill  states: 

"  Section  f>  of  the  bill  is  a  grant  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  to  allow  the 
purchase  of  property  in  the  State  of  Arizona  by  such  political  subdivisions  " — 

That  would  mean  counties  and  cities  in  California — 

•'  that  shall  have  been  allocated  rights  for  the  generation  of  power.  This, 
of  course,  has  particular  reference  to  the  city  of  Los  Angeles,  Imperial  Valley, 
and  other  cities  in  southern  California  and  the  State  of  California,  and  it  does 
not  appear  to  me  that  either  the  State  of  California  or  any  political  subdivision 
of  the  State  of  California  should  be  permitted  to  purchase  and  own  property 
that  might  be  determined  to  be  real  property,  of  the  character  referred  to,  in 
the  State  of  Arizona  in  perpetuity,  and.  therefore.  I  object  to  section  5  in  its 
1 1 resent  form. 

"I  realize  that  if  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  were  constructed  at  the  present 
time  it  would  be  necessary  to  allow  a  portion  at  least  of  the  power  to  go  to 
California  points,  as  well  as  Nevada  and  I'tah.  because  there  would  not  be  a 
market  for  all  the  power  that  could  be  produced  there  within  the  State  of 
Arizona,  and  I  see  no  objection  in  that  :  but  to  allow  Los  Angeles,  for  instance. 
to  come  into  the  State  of  Arizona  and  purchase  the  power  plant  and  lands 
necessary  in  its  operation,  or  the  dam  and  plant  to  hold  in  perpetuity.  I  think 
is  going  tp!0  far.  There  should  be  a  time  limit  on  any  possessory  right  owned, 
by  outside  political  subdivisions,  at  the  termination  of  which  either  the  Gov- 
ernment of  The  Tinted  States  or  the  State  of  Arizona  should  have  the  right 
to  take  over  the  property  and  rights  attached  thereto." 

It  appears  from  this  letter  that  the  same  thought  is  in  the  minds  of  the 
people  of  Arizona  as'that  which  you  have  expressed  here,  that  if  the  Boulder 
Canyon  Dam  is  built  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States  this  bill  should 


116  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX. 

make  it  perfectly  plain  that  only  the  Government  should  have  any  right  in  per- 
petuity in  it. 

Mr.  GARB.  My  observation  is  that  States  and  cities  frequently  get  into  appar- 
ently very  heated  controversies,  but  when  they  sit  down  around  the  table  and 
talk  it  over  they  have  no  particular  difficulty  in  adjusting  their  controversies 
and  they  get  along  pretty  well.  That  has  been  our  experience.  We  have  our 
local  fights,  but  we  always  adjust  them  very  nicely,  and  I  have  no  doubt  that 
could  be  done  in  this  instance.  There,  is  no  doubt  in  my  mind  but  what  Arizona. 
Nevada,  and  all  the  other  States  should  be  very  fully  protected.  I  do  think 
there  is  an  absolute  community  of  intei-est  there  and  when  the  whole  matter 
is  talked  over  and  adjusted  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  I  do  not  believe 
you  will  find  anything  remaining  to  be  adjusted  as  between  Arizona  or  any  of 
the  other  communities  and  our  people.  I  think  you  people  will  want  to  be 
more  than  fair  with  us  and  our  people  will  want  to  be  fair  with  the  other 
communities. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Mr.  Hayden's  question  and  your  answer  do  not  intend  to  leave 
the  impression  with  the  committee,  which  would  go  to  the  House,  that  this 
dam  or  any  part  of  it  would  be  turned  over,  or  any  interest  in  it,  in  perpetuity 
to  anyone. 

Mr.  CARR.  No;  the  bill  specifically  provides  that  title  to  the  dam  shall  always, 
remain  in  the  Federal  Government.  He  is  talking — and  I  had  that  in  mind  in 
answering — with  regard  to  the  power  plant. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Well,  the  Government  would  own  the  power  plant,  which  would 
be  a  part  of  the  dam.  They  would  all  be  connected  together? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes  and  no. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Just  a  moment.  Because  of  this  diversity  of  interest  in  the  sev- 
eral States  the  Government  ought  to  retain  full  control  so  as  at  all  times — not 
only  now  but  in  the  future — to  properly  allocate  that  power  to  the  various 
interests  and  so  they  would  all  get  a  fair  deal. 

Mr.  CARR.  I  think  the  Government  could  retain  control  so  as  to  see  that  there 
is  a  fair  allotment  to  the  respective  interests.  I  agree  with  you  on  that.  I 
said  yes  and  no  because  the.  original  bill  did  not  contemplate  that  the  Govern- 
ment should  actually  build  the  power  plant,  while  Secretary  Fall's  suggested 
scheme  does.  However,  that  is  a  detail  the  committee  will  have  to  work  out. 

Mr.  RAKER.  \Vhat  is  your  view  as  to  the  power  plant  and  the  main  transmis- 
sion line? 

Mr.  CARR.  My  idea  is  that  it  should  be  left  optional  with  the  Secretary,  after 
a  full  hearing,  to  decide  whether  he  should  build  the  power  plant  or  not. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Leaving  out  the  transmission  line,  the  Government  owns  the  dam? 

Mr.  CARR.  Yes. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Then  why  turn  over  the  power  plant  to  individuals? 

Mr.  CARR.  I  think  it  will  be  largely  a  financial  question  with  the  Government 
and  one  that  ought  to  be  worked  out  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  taking 
everything  into  consideration.  I  think  our  idea  generally  is  that  they  should 
give  him  fairly  broad  discretion  in  working  out  the  best  way.  because  you 
can  not  foresee  everything. 

Mr.  BARHOTR.  The  people  down  there  have  no  objection  to  the  Government 
retaining  possession  and  ownership. 

Mr.  CARR.  No.  I  believe  that  is  purely  a  matter  of  detail  to  be  worked  out 
after  a  full  hearing.  If  you  will  excuse  me.  I  know  Mr.  Nickerson  can  help  the 
committee  most,  although  I  dearly  love  to  answer  questions. 

Mr.  RAKER.  This  is  a  big  matter,  and  we  did  not  want  you  to  leave  ns  too 
quickly. 

Mr.  SixNOTT.  The  next  witness  is  Doctor  Walker,  president  of  the  State  farm 
bureau. 

STATEMENT  OF  DR.   W.  H.   WALKER. 

Doctor  WALKER.  I  have  been  over  the  Imperial  Valley  several  times  and 

Mr.  SIXNOTT  (interposing).  Will  you  state  to  the  committee  who  yon  are  and 
whom  you  represent? 

Doctor  WALKER.  I  am  Dr.  W.  H.  Walker,  president  of  the  California  Farm 
Bureau  Federation  and  a  member  of  the  executive  committee  of  the  American 
Farm  Bureau  Federation.  I  am  here  representing  the  California  farmers. 

Mr.   SIXNOTT.  Where  do  you   reside? 

Doctor  WALKER.  I  am  a  resident  of  Willows.  Calif.,  «nd  my  office  is  in 
Berkeley. 


DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER   COLORADO    RIVER   BASIN.  117 

Mr.  RAKER.  How  long  have  you  been  in  this  work? 

Doctor  WAI.KKK.  Alxnit  four  years  in  the  farm  bureau  work. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  was  your  work  before  that? 
Doctor  WALKER.  Physician. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  were  doctoring'  agricultural  interests? 

Doctor  WALKER.  No;  I  was  doctoring  Senators  and  Representatives.  I  have 
been  over  this  area — all  over  the  State  and  through  the  Imperial  Valley — many 
times.  I  know  of  no  State  on  earth  where  the  whole  work  is  up  to  the  man  as 
much  as  it  is  in  the  Imperial  Valley.  Water  is  an  absolute  necessity  for  the 
men  in  that  valley  in  that  it  becomes  very  vital  to  them. 

Now.  as  to  tlie  matter  of  protection  :  In  my  opinion  the  situation  they  are 
in  right  now.  and  under  the  conditions  they  are  working.  Financial  assistance 
is  practically  denied  them.  That  is  because  of  the  manner  in  which  they  are 
compelled  to  operate,  and  they  can  not  develop  that  country  with  the  handicap 
they  are  carrying  now.  The  Federal  land  bank  has  denied  them  credit  and 
the  local  banks  are  practically  denying  credit  because  of  the  conditions  under 
which  they  are  working  and  with  this  fear  hanging  over  them. 

As  to  the  matter  of  the  danger  of  silt — and  that  is  all  in  these  reports,  and  I 
can  not  but  agree  with  them — you  will  rind  a  tremendous  amount  of  silt 
coming  in  there,  even  along  the  irrigating  ditches,  and  it  sometimes  gets  so 
high  as  to  bank  the  fields  from  the  roadway  as  you  drive  along.  That  is 
building  up  this  dam  and  rendering  a  danger  there. 

As  to  the  matter  of  objections  to  the  opening  of  new  territory  because  of 
the  precipitation  of  increased  production,  I  would  like  to  say  that  I  have  heard 
some  people  say  that  there  is  an  overproduction  in  the  country  at  the  present 
time,  but  the  California  Farm  Bureau  and  the  American  Farm  Bureau  Federa- 
tion do  not  stand  for  any  such  statement  as  that.  We  are  strongly  in  favor 
of  reclamation  and  development  because  we  know  America  is  fast  approaching 
the  period  when  it  will  be  an  importing  Nation  on  foodstuffs.  We  have  almost 
reached  that  point  now.  and  the  best  authority  as  to  that — and  I  have  looked 
that  up — is  the  Assistant  Secretary  of  Agriculture,  and.  if  I  may,  I  will  read 
what  he  says  in  that  respect : 

"This  Nation  is  rapidly  approaching  a  critical  period  in  her  development. 
She  has  long  been  one  of  the  greatest  food-producing  nations  of  the  world  and 
has  also  been  a  large  exporter  from  her  abundance.  Now.  however,  she  is 
rapidly  approaching  the  time  when  she  will  need  all  her  own  production  and 
possibly  more.  *  *  *  Taking  the  crop  production  as  a  whole,  statisticians 
have  figured  that  we  are  becoming  a  food-importing  rather  than  a  food-exporting 
Nation  within  the  period  of  from  15  to  L'5  years.  In  fact,  the  situation  is  worse 
than  that — we  are  to-day  importing  more  food  than  we  are  exporting,  measured 
by  money  value." 

I  have  heard  it  stated  that  the  ratio  of  increase  is  something  like  15  per  cent, 
while  our  increase  of  food  production  runs  only  about  10  per  cent,  so  that 
there  is  about  a  5  per  cent  margin  between  the  two.  and  we  will  need  this 
additional  land.  It  must  be  developed  if  we  are  to  keep  pace  in  supplying  our 
food  and  also  our  raw  materials  as  a  Nation,  and  yet,  in  face  of  that  fact,  some 
People  hold  up  their  hands  in  horror  and  say  we  are  about  to  precipitate  condi- 
tions which  will  make  that  worse  when,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  not  over- 
production that  is  troubling  us. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  That  was  the  argument  advanced  against  the  homestead  bill. 

Doctor  WAI.KKK.  Yes. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  What  particular  individual  or  organization  of  any  im- 
portance is  contending  that  we  do  not  need  more  land  under  cultivation? 

Doctor  WALKER.  I  have  seen  it  in  magazine  articles.  I  would  not  say  any 
organization:  but  we  want  to  go  on  record,  the  American  Farm  Bureau  Fed- 
eration and  the  California  Farm  Bureau  Federation,  as  not  believing  in  that 
theory  and  we  are  not  working  along  those  lines. 

Mr.'  SMITH  of  Idaho:  There  is  a  farm  paper  published  in  Springliel  1.  Mass.. 
of  which  Mr.  Herbert  Myrick  is  editor,  which  argues  from  that  standpoint: 
in  other  words,  applying  the  "closed  shop"  idea  to  agriculture. 

Mr.  SINXOTT.  The  legislative  representative  of  the  National  Grange  appeared 
before  the  Public  Lands  Committee  and  advanced  that  argument  two  years 
ago. 

Doctor  WAI.KKK.  That  which  I  have  quoted  is  from  Dr.  E.  D.  Ball,  Assistant 
Secretary  of  Agriculture. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  Is  it  not  also  true  that  even  if  there  were  any  merit  in  the 
contention  that  more  foodstuffs  are  being  produced  in  the  United  States  than 


118  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

are  necessary,  that  the  character  of  crops  grown  in  California,  and  particu- 
larly in  the  Imperial  Valley,  are  such  that  they  do  not  directly  compete  with 
the  communities  in  the  East  where  that  argument  is  advanced? 

Doctor  WALKER.  Not  so  much.  That  section  of  the  country  would  not  com- 
pete with  the  corn  belt,  and  yet  I  have  gone  into  the  Imperial  Valley  and  made 
contracts  for  grain  deliveries  under  our  cooperative  marketing  down  there 
and  we  got  considerable  grain.  But,  of  course,  there  are  other  products 
which  would  not  compete,  such  as  vegetables,  lettuce,  melons,  and  such  as  that. 

Mr.  HAYDKN.  Crops  which  can  not  be  grown  in  other  parts  of  the  United 
States  at  the  season  of  the  year  during  which  they  are  produced  in  the  Im- 
perial Valley? 

Doctor  WALKER.  I  was  in  Portland  before  the  chamber  of  commerce  less  than 
a  year  ago  and  the  charitable  societies  there  had  600  families  on  their  hands. 
Afterwards  I  learned  that  within  three  hours'  ride  of  Portland  hundreds  of 
carloads  of  produce  were  rotting  in  the  fields,  and  yet  they  had  there  hun- 
dreds of  families  in  need.  That  was  not  overproduction  of  food,  hut  it  was 
inability  to  distribute — and  there  is  where  your  trouble  is.  You  will  find  that 
condition  not  only  in  Portland  but  right  here  in  Washington. 

Mr.  RAKKI:.  Doctor,  in  your  connection  with  the  American  Farm  P.ureau  and 
the  California  Farm  Bureau  during  the  last  four  years  have  you  had  an  op- 
portunity to  make  a  study  and  investigation  of  agricultural  production  in  the 
United  States? 

Doctor  WALKER.  Well,  in  a  general  way. 

Mr.  RAKER.  From  that  observation,  taking  the  development  of  the  Imperial 
Valley  under  this  irrigation  scheme,  the  land  in  Arizona  and  the  general  idea 
of  reclaiming  this  arid  land,  would  that  mean  an  overproduction  of  farm  prod- 
ucts in  the  United  States? 

Doctor  WALKER.  Not  at  all :  I  do  not  consider  it  would  at  all. 

Mr.  RAKER.  According  to  your  view  would  the  production  in  these  Western 
and  Southwestern  States  in  any  way  interfere  with  or  be  detrimental  to  the 
farmers  of  Kansas,  Iowa.  Illinois,  and  Indiana? 

Doctor  WALKER.  I  do  not  think  so. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  argument  has  been  made,  not  only  before  the  Public  Lands 
Committee  but  before  this  committee. 

Doctor  WALKER.  Speaking  for  California  alone,  we  do  not  raise  enough  pork 
to  supply  California,  we  do  not  raise  enough  wheat  to  supply  California,  and  we 
do  not  raise  enough  barley  to  supply  California :  we  ship  it  in,  although  there 
is  an  export  type  of  barley  that  we  do  export.  So  that  of  the  grains  that  affect 
the  Middle  West,  there  is  demand  for  them  right  there  in  California,  a  demand 
for  more  than  we  are  producing  at  the  present  time. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Is  it  not  true  that  about  60  per  cent  of  the  farmers  of 
the  country  simply  raise  sufficient  products  for  their  own  use  and  do  not  enter 
the  markets  very  extensively?  I  know  that  was  true  in  eastern  Ohio,  where  I 
was  reared.  The  farmers  did  not  have  much  to  sell;  they  raised  enough  for 
their  families  and  sold  only  enough  to  buy  some  sugar,  coffee,  and  a  few  clothes, 
and  it  seems  to  me  we  ought  to  look  to  the  interests  of  the  great  mass  of  the 
people  who  want  a  home  on  the  soil  and  only  can  raise  enough  to  sustain  them- 
selves and  raise  their  families  as  well  as  to  those  who  farm  for  the  purpose  of 
getting  rich. 

Doctor  WALKER.  Of  course,  all  farmers  have  to  sell  something  in  order  to  get 
other  necessaries  and  they  sell  it  in  the  form  of  some  food.  But  if  we  should 
go  into  that  and  I  should  attempt  to  tell  you  what  has  happened  to  fanners 
in  the  last  four  years  it  would  make  you  weep — their  inability  to  dispose  of 
their  products  at  a  reasonable  figure. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  The  farmers  who  are  embarrassed  financially  are  the 
large  producers  who  have  invested  large  capital  and  have  to  raise  a  great  deal 
and  get  a  good  price  for  it.  The  ordinary  farmer  on  the  hillside  has  not  had 
such  a  hard  time,  because  he  has  his  cows,  his  pigs,  and  his  sheep,  and  he  is  not 
financially  embarrassed  TO  an  unusual  extent.  Of  course,  you  folks  out  in  Cali- 
fornia may  not  know  about  the  small  farmers,  but  there  are  a  great  many  of 
them  throughout  the  United  States,  and  there  should  be  land  made  available 
for  a  million  more. 

Doctor  WALKER.  I  know  of  many  small  farmers  that  that  picture  does  not  fit. 
as  far  as  that  is  concerned. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Just  a  moment. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  This  is  going  to  take  us  pretty  far  afield. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  119 

Mr.  RAKKK.  Not  this  question.  This  question  is  right  square  and  will  hit  the 
bull's-eye. 

My  colleague  from  Idaho  suggests  that  the  small  farmer  raises  no  more  than 
is  necessary  for  his  existence;  hut  is  it  not  necessary  for  him  to  raise  wheat, 
harley,  chickens,  and  other  things  to  sell  so  that  the  men  in  the  city  may  get 
something  to  live  on? 

Doctor  WAI.KKR.   Yes;  I  should  say  that  it  was  necessary  to  do  that. 

Mr.  KAKKK.  And  that  is  why  we  are  trying  to  advance  the  fanner,  so  that  he 
can  raise  enough  for  himself  and  his  family  and  also  something  to  sell  in  order 
to  supply  these  necessaries  to  the  man  living  in  the  city. 

Doctor  WALKER.  I  agree  with  you  on  that.  Now,  right  on  the  line  of  over- 
production :  We  have  reached  the  peak  of  production  in  the  United  States,  and 
unless  we  farm  very  carefully  and  conserve  our  resources  and  apply  more  fer- 
tilizers we  are  going  to  slide  hackward  more  and  more.  We  have  developed  all 
of  the  virgin  territory,  and  this  area  not  only  needs  fertilizers  but  it  needs 
electrical  power.  An  electrical  journal  published  in  California — the  National 
Electrical  Journal,  I  think  is  its  title — states  that  California  uses  more  power 
for  electrical  purposes  in  agriculture  than  all  of  the  rest  of  the  United  States 
put  together,  and  we  have  a  tremendous  power  problem  facing  us. 

You  people  talk  about  000,000  horsepower  and  get  scared  over  it,  but 
I  would  like  you  to  know  that  right  at  the  present  time  in  California 
the  power  companies,  upon  which  they  are  asking  an  8  per  cent  guaranty  on 
their  capital  investn.'ent,  are  asking  the  railroad  commission,  which  is  their 
carolling  body,  to  allow  them  to  develop  $900,000.000  for  electricity  that  is 
needed  immediately  and  enough  to  make  it  $1,600,000,000  for  the  electricity 
that  will  be  needed  in  the  next  10  years — that  is,  as  they  say,  to  take  care  of 
the  demands  of  California  in  the  next  10  years;  so  that  the  power  that  will  be 
developed  at  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  will  be  more  than  consumed  before  you 
are  ready  lo  sell  it. 

Mr.  RAKKI;.  That  statement,  in  a  more  or  less  degree,  would  apply  to  Oregon. 
\Vasliington.  Nevada.  Utah.  Arizona,  and  all  of  those  Western  States? 

Doctor  WAI.KKR.  Absolutely,  because  in  any  one  of  those  places  by  pumping, 
for  example,  you  could  put  the  lands  under  irrigation,  and  wherever  you  can 
raise  sage  brush  and  can  put  water  on  the  land  you  can  raise  fine  crops. 

Mr.  RAKKK.  Would  that  development  in  any  wise  interfere  with  or  be  detri- 
mental to  the  United  States  so  far  as  the  Middle  West  is  concerned? 

Doctor  WAI.KKH.  Not  at  all,  but  it  would  be  a  help,  in  my  opinion.  Further 
taking  up  that  ]w»int,  the  absolute  necessity  of  more  agricultural  power  and 
cheaper  power,  the  very  existence  of  some  of  those  places  in  the  Western  States 
depends  on  it.  Cheaper  power  will  also  mean  cheaper  transportation,  and  that 
is  another  thing  they  depend  on,  and  right  along  that  line  we  are  reaching  the 
stage  where  we  absolutely  need  that  power.  It  will  make  our  fertilizers.  Every- 
thing that  has  been  said  in  favor  of  Muscle  Shoals  will  absolutely  apply  to  the 
development  of  electrical  power  in  this  region. 

Mr.  RAKKR.  You  mean  by  that,  that  by  virtue  of  developing  hydroelectric 
power  all  through  that  intermountain  region,  from  the  Canadian  bonier  clear 
down  10  .Mexico,  we  will  be  able  to  furnish  it  to  the  railroads  so  that  they  will 
be  able  to  assist  in  transporting  our  products  from  the  West  to  the  East? 

Doctor  WAI.KKH.  Yes;  and  it  will  conserve  our  oil.  All  this  will  be  found  in 
this  report.  We  will  be  able  to  save  many  barrels  of  oil.  The  Southern 
1'acilic  is  burning  oil  and  they  could  electrify  their  roads  by  developing  more 
power,  especially  where  wood  and  other  fuels  are  scarce.  So  that  the  very 
existence  of  the  people  practically  depends  upon  this.  I  visited  the  Canadian 
plant  with  Sir  Adam  Reck  and  T  saw  how  they  are  using  electricity  there  and 
I  saw  how  niggardly  we  are  using  it.  I  saw  how  all  of  that  great  possibility 
was  going  unchecked  and  I  saw  how  all  of  that  water  from  the  western  part 
of  the  Rocky  Mountains  was  going  to  waste.  It  is  not  only  going  to  waste/ 
but  it  is  endangering  the  lives  of  about  fifty  thousand  people  in  the  Imperial 
Valley.  It  is  a  rich  valley  :  it  thrills  a  person  to  go  in  there  and  see  what 
wonderful  accomplishments  man  has  been  able  to  make.  They  have  made 
that  country  like  a  garden,  and  from  the  standpoint  of  the  safety  of  those 
people,  from  the  standpoint  of  the  national  policy  of  increasing  production. 
2ro]i\  the  standpoint  of  increasing  the  power  for  fertilizers  and  for  cheaper 
power  I  see  no  argument  against  this  and  every  argument  for  it. 

Mr..  RAKKR.  We  have  one  other  argument ;  that  they  will  be  able  to  produce 
gold,  silver  and  other  nrnerals  in  that  country  that  they  can  not  produce  now 
because  of  the  excessive  price  of  fuel. 

1316— 22— PT  3 4 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

Doc-tor  WALKER.  Not  only  that,  hut  if  you  want  to  open  up  the  chemistry  side 
of  it  you  get  into  a  field  that  has  wonderful  possibilities.  Cheap  aluminum 
can  he  furnished  there  practically  at  the  same  time  you  are  making  fertilizers 
and  one  or  the  other  will  pay  for  the  cost  of  production,  so  that  you  will 
either  have  fertilizer  free  or  aluminum  free. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Have  you  any  other  good  things?  Because,  you  know,  there  are  a 
good  many  opposed  to  this  development  in  the  West,  and  if  you  have  any  other 
good  things  let  us  have  them  so  we  can  show  them  to  our  good  colleagues  from 
the  East. 

Doctor  WALKER.  Well,  as  to  your  colleagues  from  the  East,  I  have  profound 
respect'  for  them,  but  they  ought  to  go  West  and  see  what  the  possibilities  are 
and  unlock  some  of  the  possibilities  which  will  make  life  a  little  more  liveable 
for  the  people  out  in  those  desert  areas;  they  can  do  that  and  at  the  same 
time  add  commercially  to  the  stability  of  the  United  States.  You  take  any 
man  in  chemistry  and  let  him  unlock  the  possibilities  of  that  country  and  it 
is  wonderful  what  can  be  accomplished.  We  have  all  of  those  minerals  and 
all  of  those  metals.  They  have  not  been  adequately  developed  before  and  if 
they  are  fully  developed  we  can  make  that  a  more  wonderful  place  than  anyone 
ever  dreamed  of  its  being.  I  think  that  concludes  my  statement. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  The  next  witness  is  Gray  Silver. 

STATEMENT   OF  MB.   GRAY   SILVER,   WASHINGTON  REPRESENTA- 
TIVE AMERICAN  FARM  BUREAU  FEDERATION. 

Mr.  SILVER.  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen,  my  name  is  Gray  Silver  and  I 
represent  the  American  Farm  Bureau  Federation. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  You  are  the  legislative  representative  of  the  American  Farm 
Bureau  Federation? 

Mr.  SILVER.  Yes,  sir.  Since  Doctor  Walker  has  testified  just  ahead  of  me  and 
told  the  story.  I  scarcely  know  what  there  is  for  me  to  say  other  than  that,  in  a 
general  way,  the  American  Farm  Bureau  Federation  is  not  opposed  to  projects 
of  this  kind,  but,  on  the  contrary,  thinking  not  only  of  food  production  but  of 
protecting  the  property  and  lives  of  those  people  who  are  jeopardized  and 
thinking  of  the  power  production  for  other  purposes,  they  are  very  much  in 
favor  of  that  kind  of  development. 

The  kind  and  amount  of  crops  that  will  be  developed  by  this  project  will  not 
be  so  large  as  to  affect  the  markets,  and,  in  addition,  as  the  doctor  has  so  well 
told  you.  we  will  soon  have  overtaken  our  normal  production  of  foodstuffs  in 
this  country.  It  will  take  some  time  for  a  project  of  this  kind  to  be  constructed 
and  some  time  for  the  results  to  be  taken  to  the  market,  so  that  in  looking  ahead 
it  is  not  at  all  one  of  those  developments  that  can  be  viewed  from  the  point  of 
being  harmful  to  our  people. 

The  electrical  side  or  the  power  end  of  it  makes  a  strong  appeal  to  every 
farmer  and  the  pledging  of  public  credit  for  this  kind  of  development  is  sound, 
right,  and  proper,  because  80  per  cent  of  the  cost  of  electrical  current  is  in- 
terest charges.  If  you  develop  this  power  by  the  method  you  propose  here  and 
pledge  public  credit  on — I  do  not  know  what  the  basis  may  be,  but,  using  Muscle 
Shoals  as  an  illustration,  4  per  cent  instead  of  8  or  10  per  cent,  which  is  the 
usual  cost  of  money  for  private  development — you  at  once  cut  the  cost  of  cur- 
rent in  half ;  you  make  a  50  per  cent  decrease  in  the  sale  price  by  that  one 
move.  Then,  as  you  amortize  the  capital  cost  you  make  a  much  greater  re- 
duction. 

By  the  amortization  method  of  financing,  as  proposed  in  the  Muscle  Shoals 
case,  you  repay  all  the  capital  investment  and  have  your  power  for  the  cost  of 
maintenance,  operation,  and  depreciation. 

In  other  words,  using  the  figures  which  I  have  on  Muscle  Shoals,  and  they 
apply  to  this  project,  east  of  the  Rocky  Mountains  in  this  country  the  per- 
year  horsepower  cost  of  electrical  current  is  about  830  on  the  basis  of  all 
the  market  will  bear;  if  it  is  developed  on  this  public-credit  basis  with  the 
amortization  feature,  when  the  amortization  is  complete  it  will  cost  around 
s~>.  That  will  enable  not  only  the  production,  where  the  ore  is  available,  of 
certain  grades  of  steel  by  the  electrical  furnace  at  about  half  the  present  cost 
of  production  by  the  coke-furnace-  method,  but  it  will  permit,  on  a  very  much 
more  economical  basis,  the  fabrication  of  steel — the  making  of  tractors,  the 
making  of  binders,  the  making  of  trucks,  and  the  making  of  other  imple- 
ments from  steel,  as  well  as  the  fabricating  of  wood — the  manufacture  of 
all  those  things  that  are  made  of  wood,  in  which  power  is  a  large  factor,  and 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  121 

while,  when  you  make  the  cheap  electric  current,  you  make  all  of  those  things 
jKissihle  you  mr.ike  more  possible  the  carrying  of  this  current  to  the  farm 
homes  and  you  take  the  drudgery  out  of  the  farmhomes.  If  the  sale  price 
of  the  current  is  made  cheap  enough  the  farmers  will  be  justified  in  buying  it. 

Electricity  on  the  farm,  sold  at  a  reasonable  rate — this  rate  obtained  by  de- 
velopment at  low  interest  rates  with  amortization  of  capital  investment — will 
reorganize  a  vast  number  of  farm  operations,  reduce  the  cost,  improve  and 
increase  the  man  power  of  the  farm.  Electric  motors  will  furnish  water  every- 
where it  can  be  used  advantageously ;  electric  milking  machines  will  relieve  the 
farmer  from  one  of  the  most  trying  chores  he  has  to  perform.  Electric  motors 
will  hoist  the  hay  to  the  mow.  grind  the  feed,  thresh  the  grain,  turn  the  grind- 
stone, and  we  may  even  find  eventually  that  high-powered  electricity  will  be 
practical  in  stimulating  certain  kinds  of  plant  growth. 

Net  only  will  it  rejuvenate  the  farm  from  the  production  standpoint,  but 
home  life  will  be  reorganized  and  much  of  the  drudgery  removed.  Farm  home 
work  will  become  more  as  it  now  is  in  the  city.  The  electric  stove,  writh  its 
automatic  control,  will  do  away  with  the  long  hours  day  in  and  out  all  the 
year  through.  The  housewife  has  had  to  stand  over  the  hot  cookstove.  with 
resulting  colds  and  often  followed  by  ill  health,  to  say  nothing  of  the  enforced 
neglect  of  children  and  denial  of  self-culture  and  social  intercourse  and  other 
household  duties.  With  this  electric  method  of  cooking,  after  the  food  is  pre- 
pared and  placed  in  the  stove,  the  housewife,  in  addition  to  having  a  clean, 
smokeless  kitchen  with  temperature  not  above  the  remainder  of  the  house,  has 
a 'room  suitable  and  comfortable  for  any  domestic  purpose.  She  also  has  the 
time  of  the  cooking  period  at  her  disposal ;  for  by  this  electric  method  there 
would  be  no  fires  to  repair  or  keep  going,  so  this  time  can  be  spent  on  the 
children  or  other  household  duties,  or  visiting  the  neighbors  or  on  Sundays 
going  to  church,  to  come  back  at  the  hour  previously  determined  and  serve  a 
good  meal,  well  cooked,  with  all  the  tedious,  burdensome,  and  difficult  details 
done  away  with.  The  housewife  will  wash  the  dishes  by  electricity  instead 
of  the  old  way.  which  was  trial  to  the  women  every  meal:  wash  the  clothes  by 
electricity  and  save  all  the  back  breaking  and  hard  rubbing  over  the  wash- 
board and  steaming  suds;  rinse  by  turning  a  faucet  and  wring  by  turning  a 
lever:  iron  with  the  large  electric  iron  or  mangle,  by  which  a  two  days'  ironing 
job  is  done  in  two  or  three  hours.  All  this  means  so  much  to  the  housewife  that 
I  can  hardly  convey  to  you  the  full  import. 

And  so  with  many  other  labor-saving  devices  and  much  comfort-making  equip- 
ment, all  available  when  cost  of  electricity  is  in  proper  relation  with  the  sale 
price  of  farm  productions. 

We  have  lived  in  the  coal  age  for  a  number  of  decades.  We  are  just  beginning 
to  emerge  into  the  electrical  age.  "  White  coal  "  is  the  power  of  the  future. 
Hydroelectric  power  is.  and  probably  always  will  be,  cheaper.  So  economical, 
necessary,  and  popular  will  electric  power  become  that  before  many  decades 
coal  will  probably  be  utilized  at  the  mouth  of  the  mine  rather  than  increasing 
its  cost  by  expensive  transportation. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  mean  the  farmer  will  not  have  to  do  like  you  and  I  used 
to  have  to  do.  get  up  at  about  n  o'clock  in  the  morninsr  and  milk  the  cows  in  the 
dark,  but  they  w>ll  have  electric  light  to  see  how  to  do  it? 

Mr.  STI.VFR.  They  will  have  electric  light  and  electric  power  to  do  the  milk- 
ing, instead  of  using  their  hands.  Most  of  the  dairies  in  my  home  section  are 
now  operated  by  electricity.  I  am  not  speaking  of  the  small  dairies,  but  of 
dairies  of  some  size.  This  electric  power  will  be  used  to  make  ice  instead  of 
cutting  it.  and  if  you  ever  did  it,  you  know  it  is  not  a  nice  job  to  cut  ice  in 
the  wintertime  and  store  it  up  for  the  summer.  Refrigerators  \vill  be  wired 
to  use  electricity  and  make  little  cubes  of  ice  as  they  need  them  daily,  and  not 
try  the  patience  of  the  women  folks  awaiting  for  the  men  to  come  and  get  ice 
from  the  ice  house.  All  of  these  things  are  not  being  guessed  at.  but  they  are 
actually  being  done,  and  the  limiting  factor  in  the  use  of  it  is  the  cost  of  elec- 
trical current. 

Mr.  HARBOUR.  They  could  heat  their  houses  with  it. 

Mr.  SILVER.  In  my  home  for  the  past  ten  years  we  have  cooked  wholly  by 
electricity,  and  it  is  not  an  unusual  thing  in  my  community.  On  many  farms 
the  cooking  is  done  entirely  by  electricity.  It  is  a  matter  of  great  comfort  to 
the  housewife  to  be  able  to  prepare  a  meal  and  cook  it  on  an  electric  stove. 
Then,  either  by  setting  the  switch  which  turns  on  the  hont  at  a  certain  time 
as  may  be  required  or  by  setting  it  so  that  the  switch  will  be  thrown  off  when 
the  proper  heating  point  has  been  reached,  the  housewife  can  go  to  church, 


122  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

if  you  please,  on  Sundays,  or  if  it  is  on  a  week  day  she  can  make  a  call,  know- 
ing that  the  meal  will  be  properly  cooked  with  no  danger  of  burning.  There 
is  no  possibility  of  burning  the  food,  but  the  heat  is  simply  turned  off  auto- 
matically when  the  temperature  reaches  a  certain  set  point  which  is  the  proper 
heat  for  cooking  whatever  kind  of  food  is  in  the  stove.  The  food  is  cooked  in 
a  tireless-cooker  compartment  alter  it  has  reached  the  right  temperature. 
Nothing  is  burned  or  overcooked  and  nothing  is  undercooked.  There  are  many 
different  kinds  of  things  that  can  be  done  with  this  j>ower  on  the  farm.  For 
instance,  carrying  water  is  not  an  attractive  job  to  the  boy,  and  that  can  be 
done  away  with.  Those  things  will  be  done  away  with  on  all  the  farms  where 
the  current  can  he  obtained  economically  or  cheaply  enough  to  enable  the  farm- 
ers to  take  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  would  be  able  to  do  away  with  the  noon-hour  job  for  the 
boy  of  turning  the  grindstone,  because  the  grindstone  would  be  turned  by  elec- 
tricity, and  the  boy  would  be  given  some  rest. 

Mr.  SII.VKI:.  Yes.  sir.  Then,  think  of  the  railroad  situation.  Electricity  is 
going  to  bring  cheaper  transportation  by  rail  than  we  have  ever  had.  Has  it 
ever  occurred  to  you  that  25  per  cent  of  the  freight  cars  now  on  the  rail- 
roads would,  by  using  electricity,  give  the  public  the  same  service  that  loo 
per  cent  are  giving  under  present  methods v  For  instance,  800  miles  of  the 
Chicago,,  Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul  Railroad  have  been  electrified,  as  some  of  you 
know,  and  it  has  been  shown  that  they  carry  freight  14  miles  per  day  as  against 
7  miles  per  day  by  steam  power.  Barring  the  time  that  would  be  taken  in  load- 
ing and  unloading,  it  would  mean  that  half  the  number  of  cars  that  are  now 
in  use  would  move  the  same  amount  of  freight  if  they  were  electrified. 

Mr.  SMITH.  Why  is  the  movement  of  trains  expedited  so  greatly  when  the 
roads  are  electrified? 

Mr.  SILVER.  There  are  several  reasons.  One  is  illustrated  by  the  experience 
in  West  Virginia  on  a  bad  grade,  in  going  tip  the  grade  to  BHietields'  and 
Roanoke,  where  before  electrification  took  place  it  was  one  of  the  most  d'fticult 
grades  to  get  trains  over.  A  steam  engine  pulls  by  jerks,  while  an  electric 
motor  pulls  steadily.  Before  electrification  took  place,  freight  trains  were  so 
continually  breaking  down  and  being  pulled  in  two  that  they  laid  a  special 
passenger-train  track  around  those  hills  so  that  the  passenger  trains  might  pro- 
ceed. The  freight  trains  almost  always  had  the  line  blocked.  In  the  eight 
years  since  the  electrification  of  that  piece  of  road  there  has  not  been  a  single 
drawbar  head  pulled  out  or  a  single  break  in  those  freight  trains.  The  freight 
trains  have  been  made  even  longer  on  that  road,  and  with  exactly  the  same 
kind  of  equipment;  but  with  a  different  kind  of  pull,  they  avoid  that  difficulty. 

Another  consideration  is  this:  The  steam  engine  must  be  run  in  every  six  or 
eight  hours  to  be  looked  over  by  hostlers  and  caretakers.  It  must  be  rested 
and  rejuvenated  for  the  next  trip,  while  the  electrical  motor  will  run  for  -0 
hours  or  more  without  stopping.  The  electric  motor  runs  in  a  different  way 
from  the  steam  engine  and  it  is  operated  in  such  a  way  as  to  give  the  tra:n 
added  speed  and,  further,  it  picks  up  speed  much  quicker  and  stops  i] nicker. 
and,  as  I  have  said,  it  makes  fewer  stops.  That,  of  course,  means  more  time 
gained.  As  I  have  said,  there  would  be  a  saving  of  50  per  cent  in  the  matter 
of  cars  because  of  the  saving  in  time.  Then.  25  per  cent  of  the  cars.  or.  to  be 
exact,  23.8  per  cent  of  the  cars,  now  being  operated  in  the  freight  service  are 
used  for  hauling  coal  and  other  things  in  connection  therewith  for  the  railroads' 
operations,  so  that  there  would  be  a  saving  of  approximately  25  per  cent  more 
in  the  matter  of  cars  with  power  carried  on  wires.  The  public  could  get  as 
much  service  out  of  25  per  cent  of  the  cars  as  it  now  gets  out  of  100  per  cent 
if  the  lines  were  electrified.  That,  of  course,  means  a  great  saving.  It  is 
so  great  that  I  do  not  know  how  to  estimate  it  in  dollars.  It  should  mean 
cheaper  freight  than  we  have  ever  yet  enjoyed  by  any  kind  of  transportation 
facilities. 

I  shall  not  testify  any  longer,  except  to  say  that  we  are  in  full  sympathy 
with  this  development.  We  are  in  sympathy  with  it  because  we  bel'eve  that  it 
is  sound  and  logical  and  we-  believe  that  it  is  needed.  If  we  do  not  have  a 
better  distribution  of  food  supplies  than  we  have  had  recently  we  are  undone. 
We  must  have  improved  means  of  distribution. 

Mr.  WILLIAMSON.  Have  you  any  idea  what  would  be  the  percentage  of  re- 
duction in  the  cost  of  transportation  that  would  be  made  possible  by  electrifying 
the  railroads? 

Mr.  SILVER.  I  would  not  know  how  to  give  you  that  estimate.  I  do  not  have 
that  estimate. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  123 

Mr.  Wn.i.iAAiso.N.  How  much  would  it  reduce  the  cost  of  operation,  approxi- 
mately? 

Mr.  SILVER.  I  do  not  have  that  information.  You  could  likely  get  that  from 
the  superpower  survey  or  you  could  probably  get  from  them  sonve  interesting 
statistics  on  that  phase  of  it.  I  do  not  have  in  mind  just  what  the  economies 
are,  but  they  are  very  great.  For  one  thing,  the  labor  is  less  and  it  involves  a 
simpler  process,  requiring  fewer  men.  You  do  not  have  the  same  trouble  in 
training  men  to  operate  electrical  motors  that  you  have  in  training  them  to 
operate  steam  engines.  It  is  not  so  long  a  process — and  it  would  avoid  labor 
conflicts  to  some  degree.  It  is  very  desirable  from  every  viewpoint,  and  the 
argument  that  we  can  never  find  the  nvoney  to  make  this  development  is  not 
well  founded  because  the  economies  would  be  such  that  there  would  be  a  great 
saving  in  the  end.  There  would  not  be  required  anywhere  near  so  much  rolling 
stock  as  is  required  at  present.  However,  I  believe  that  these  natural  re- 
sources should  be  developed  by  pledging  the  public  credit  so  that  the  public  in 
that  way  may  maintain  its  equity  in  them. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So  it  is  our  view  that  the  development  of  this  Boulder  Canyon 
Dam,  and  other  developments  along  the  Colorado  River  in  connection  with 
those  seven  States  in  the  Southwest,  would  be  developments  of  as  great  advan- 
tage to  the  people  in  that  section  as  tbe  development  of  Muscle  Shoals  would 
be  to  the  people  of  the  Southern  States? 

Mr.  SILVER.  To  my  mind  it  is  in  the  same  class.  I  think  it  is  the  sanve  kind 
of  development  and  will  he  helpful  to  the  whole  people.  The  two  projects 
should  be  classified  alike.  The  same  purposes  are  served.  In  the  West  there 
is  a  limitation  placed  upon  production  by  the  amount  of  water  available.  It  is 
not  a  matter  of  plant  food  because  you  have  the  fertilizing  elements  in  this 
soil  in  the  West.  In  the  East  we  put  the  water  over  the  wheels  and  take  from 
the  air  the  fertilizing  elements  required  for  the  soil.  They  are  using  natural 
resources  just  the  same  but  applying  them  in  a  different  way. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  think  that  the  Government  would  be  thoroughly  justified  in 
entering  UJKHI  a  development  work  like  this? 

Mr.  SILVEK.  Yes.  sir.  I  think  that  is  the  way  to  make  progress  in  production, 
distribution,  and  home  making.  I  thank  you,  gentlemen,  for  your  attention. 

STATEMENT    OF   MB.    J.   S.    NICKERSON,    PRESIDENT   OF   THE 
IMPERIAL  IRRIGATION  BOARD. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen  of  the  committe,  I  represent 
the  Imperial  irrigation  district,  and  am  sent  here  for  that  purpose.  We  have 
in  that  valley  50,000  people,  and  we  have  450,000  acres  under  cultivation,  more 
or  less.  I  am  president  of  a  Mexican  company,  down  in  Mexico,  as  Judge  Swing 
told  you,  which  is  a  wheel  within  a  wheel.  The  directors,  there  being  three  of 
us,  hold  that  Mexican  stock.  We  have  in  the  neighborhood  of  200,000  acres 
there  under  cultivation.  Therefore  I  ought  to  be  able  to  give  you  the  farmer's 
side  of  it  fairly  well  in  going  over  the  local  conditions  there.  Now,  in  Mexico 
we  have  133  miles  of  main  canals  to  maintain,  and  of  levees  we  have  75  miles. 
We  have  50  miles  of  railroad  track  on  those  levees  that  we  must  keep  up  and 
operate.  Now,  why  do  we  want  to  change  our  condition,  and  why  do  we  want 
to  get  out  of  Mexico  and  build  this  all-American  canal?  In  the  first  place,  the 
cost  to  the  people  below  the  line  is  $2.50  per  acre  a  year  to  irrigate,  while  on 
the  American  side  the  cost  is  $7  per  acre.  That  is  a  pretty  good  reason  why 
we -should  want  to  get  out  of  there.  With  this  new  canal  we  would  have  150,000 
or  200,000  acres  of  land  that  would  be  brought  under  ciiltivation.  That  is  the 
largest  and  best  body  of  land  now  available  in  the  United  States. 

Mr.  WILLIAMSON.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  the  cost  of  irrigation  on  the 
Mexican  side  was  $2  per  acere,  while  the  cost  on  the  xXmerican  side  was  $7  per 
acre. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  I  said  the  cost  was  $2.50  an  acre  on  the  Mexican  side. 

Mr.  WILLIAMSON.  Then  it  would  be  to  yorir  advantage  to  remain  on  the 
Mexican  side,  would  it  not? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  That  is  what  it  cost  them  to  get  their  water  on  the  Mexican 
side,  or  the  actual  cost  that  they  pay  for  water  is  $2.50  per  acre,  while  it  costs 
the  farmers  on  the  American  side  $7  per  acre. 

Mr.  BARBOUB.  And  you  take  the  water  through  the  same  canal? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes,  sir;  we  must  maintain  the  canal  at  the  expense  of  the 
people  on  the  American  side. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Can  you  tell  the  committee  now  just  why  that  condition  exists? 


124      DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIX. 

Mr.  NICKEBSON.  I  can  tell  you  why  we  want  to  get  out  of  Mexico.  As  I  have 
said,  there  is  that  difference  in  the  cost  of  water,  or  that  difference  between 
the  cost  of  water  used  on  the  American  side  and  the  water  used  on  the  Mex- 
ican side.  There  is  quite  a  difference  in  the  cost.  As  I  have  said,  this  is  the 
largest  and  best  body  of  land  that  is  now  available  in  the  United  States  to-day, 
and  we  have  provided  in  this  bill  that  the  Legion  boys  shall  have  a  preferential 
right  to  that  land.  They  are  anxious  to  get  it,  and  they  will  get  a  preferential 
right  to  it. 

Mr.  LINEBEBGER.  By  Legion  men  you  mean  ex-service  men? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  have  stated  that  on  the  Mexican  side  the  cost  of  the  water 
was  $2.50  per  acre  per  annum,  while  on  the  American  side  the  cost  was  *7  pet- 
acre  per  annum. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.   Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  it  has  been  stated  that  they  take  it  out  of  the  same  canal  and 
from  the  same  dam.  The  same  dam  supplies  the  water  from  the  river,  and  it 
is  run  in  the  same  ditch.  Now,  why  is  it  that  on  the  Mexican  side  they'  are 
obtaining  water  at  a  cost  of  $2.50  per  acre  per  annum  while  on  the  American 
side  the  cost  is  $7  per  acre?  Will  you  teil  the  committee  why  that  difference 
exists? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  I  will  tell  you:  They  pay  the  same  price  for  water,  or  they 
charge  the  same  as  we  do,  but  there  is  a  difference  in  the  cost  of  maintaining 
the  canal.  They  do  not  pay  for  the  maintenance  of  the  canal.  We  have  to 
pay  for  the  water  on  the  American  side,  and  we  must  pay  for  the  maintenance 
of  the  canal. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Why  do  they  not  pay  their  proportionate  share  of  the  cost  OL 
maintaining  the  canals,  levees,  and  railroad? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  In  the  first  place  the  contract  does  not  specify  that  they  have 
to  do  it,  and,  in  the  second  place,  there  is  no  Mexican  Government  to  deal  with. 
During  the  last  year  there  have  been  some  three  or  four  governors  down  there, 
and  yon  can  not  hope  to  do  anything  with  that  kind  of  government.  As  a  mat- 
ter of  fact,  there  is  no  head  of  the  Mexican  Government,  and  Mexico  is  in 
reality  a  revolutionary  foreign  country. 

Mr.  SWING.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  they  can  not  be  charged  any  more  for  water 
than  the  Mexican  Government  will  consent  for  them  to  be  charged? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  the  reason  why. 

Mr.  RAKER.  There  was  a  contract  between  the  owners  on  the  Mexican  siik- 
and  the  owners  on  the  American  side? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  There  was  an  old  concession  of  a  private  company  which  has 
been  handed  down  two  or  three  times,  and  we  are  the  last  ones  to  hold  it.  Under 
that  contract  they  were  to  take  all  the  water  they  wanted,  up  to  one-half  of  the 
water,  and  there  was  a  price  fixed  for  the  water. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  in  that  agreement  you  overlooked  the  fixing  of  the  cost  of 
maintaining  the  canals,  levees,  and  railroad? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Well,  those  levees  are  something  that  have  shown  up  since 
that  contract  was  entered  into.  It  has  been  shown  here  that  the  conditions  on 
the  river  changed  so  rapidly  that  no  one  could  keep  up  with  them. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Everybody  else  here  may  understand  it,  and  I  do  not  want  to  be 
the  only  one  who  is  dense,  but  I  want  that  matter  clearly  explained.  Here  is 
water  furnished  from  the  same  river,  diverted  by  the  same  dam,  taken  through 
the  same  canals,  with  the  same  levees  and  the  same  railroad  used  to  maintain 
the  water  supply,  and  I  want  to  know  why  these  Mexican  people  do  not  pay 
their  proportionate  share  of  the  cost  of  the  maintenance  of  the  canals,  levees, 
and  railroads? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Because  they  do  not  have  to.  There  is  no  government  there, 
or  there  is  nobody  at  the  head  of  the  government.  I  went  down  there  a  year 
ago  last  February — to  Mexico  City — and  told  them  what  our  condition  was 
down  there.  They  smoothed  me  down  the  back  in  the  Mexican  way,  and  said 
that  I  was  absolutely  right  about  it.  They  said  they  thought  they  should  help, 
and  they  figured  we  should  have  half  a  million  dollars  in  gold  from  them.  I 
said  to  them,  "  Well,  if  you  will  give  us  $15,000  or  $20,000  per  month  to  get  the 
thing  started,  it  would  be  of  great  assistance."  They  did  not  see  any  reason  why 
that  should  not  be  done,  but  that  was  the  last  I  heard  of  it.  I  lived  in  that 
country  for  14  years. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Now,  tell  us  why  you  do  not  shut  the  water  off  from  them,  as  you 
would  on  the  American  side,  when  they  do  not  pay  the>'r  proportionate  share  of 
the  cost  of  maintaining  the  canals,  levees,  and  railroad? 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  125 

Mr.  NICKEBSON.  I  can  tell  you  that  very  easily :  We  have  to  go  through  their 
country  to  get  water  into  our  territory,  and,  as  I  have  said,  that  is  nothing  but 
a  revolutionary  foreign  country.  They  have  no  government. 

Mr.  BAKBOUR.  If  you  should  shut  off  their  water,  you  would  shut  off  your 
own? 

Mr.  NICKEBSON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  SMITH.  What  quantity  of  land  is  being  irrigated  down  in  that  portion  of 
Mexico  ? 

.Mr.  XICKERSON.  It  has  been  stated  that  there  are  150,000  acres,  but  it  is  more 
than  that. 

Mr.  SMITH.  Do  you  know  how  rapidly  additional  lands  are  being  taken  up? 

Mr.  NICKEBSON.  There  is  a  lot  of  it.  There  are  at  least  25,000  acres  a  year 
coming  in. 

Mr.  SMITH.  How  long  will  it  be  before  the  Mexican  laud  will  absorb  all  of 
the  water,  and  you  people  will  not  have  any? 

Mr.  NICKEBSON.  They  will  not  absorb  all  of  it,  but  it  is  a  dangerous  proposi- 
tion, and  we  are  inviting  trouble  there,  because  they  will  establish  water  rights. 
At  the  same  time,  we  are  taking  our  water  in  there,  because  we  can  not  help 
ourselves,  but  they  are  arbitrarily  establishing  water  rights  by  the  use  of  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  If  you  attempted  to  shut  off  the  water  from  the  users  on  the 
Mexican  side,  a  good  many  of  whom,  I  presume,  are  Americans 

Mr.  NICKEBSON  (interposing).  We  can  not  do  it.  Last  year  they  arbitrarily 
went  to  work  and  put  a  dam  in  our  main  canal,  and  it  was  absolutely  injurious 
to  us,  because  it  filled  the  canal  up  with  silt. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Why  did  you  not  take  the  dam  out? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  It  was  in  Mexico,  a.  revolutionary  foreign  country.  They 
have  too  many  soldiers  there. 

Mr.  SWING.  We  are  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  Mexico  so  far  as  that  part 
of  the  canal  is  concerned. 

Mr.  RAKEB.  I  wanted  Mr.  Nickerson  to  tell  the  committee  why  they  could 
not  shut  off  the  water. 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  Because  it  would  shut  our  water  off.  We  would  dry  our- 
selves ii])  if  we  did  th.it.  That  would  dry  us  up. 

.Mr.  HAKKR.  How  does  it  happen  that  you  give  them  any  of  this  water? 

.Mr.  XICKEBSON.  That  was  a  private  company  that  had  a  concession  from 
the  Mexican  Government.  At  that  time  they  never  figured  that  there  would 
be  much  land  under  cultivation  in  Mexico,  and  they  had  to  submit  to  those 
conditions  in  order  to  get  the  water  in  on  the  American  side,  because  they 
could  not  cut  through  the  sand  hill  without  too  great  expense. 

Mr.  SWING.  That  company  was  a  Mexican  company? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  KAKKR.  Will  you  explain  to  the  committee  how  you  will  be  protected 
in  the  matter  of  your  water  supply  if  you  make  this  change? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  We  will  keep  it  on  our  side  of  the  line.  It  was  possible  to 
do  that,  but  when  it  was  done,  it  was  not  at  the  Laguna  Dam.  They  came 
down  below  Yiuna,  and  made  this  diversion,  but  it  was  not  the  place  to  do 
it.  It  should  have  been  made  at  the  Laguna  Dam  in  the  first  place,  but  we 
did  not  have  the  money  to  do  it. 

Mr.  SMITH.  Mr.  Nickerson,  would  you  prefer  to  go  ahead  and  make  your 
statement  without  interruption? 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  hear  that  suggestion  a  good  deal,  but  in  taking  testimony 
like  this,  we  want  to  get  full  information.  I  do  not  want  to  interrupt  you 
except  to  get  the  facts. 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  Gentlemen,  I  am  here  to  go  down  on  my  knees  before  the 
committee  or  to  do  anything  within  reason  in  order  to  get  help  for  those  people. 
Xow.  there  is  another  thing  I  want  to  say  to  you  as  a  reason  why  we  want  to 
get  out  of  there:  Our  expenses  in  Mexico  from  May  1,  1910,  to  May  1.  1022, 
were  *12.!>:>7.X1S.  I  have  an  itemized  statement  covering  every  dollar  of  that 
expenditure,  and  will  file  't  with  the  committee.  Something  was  said,  I 
believe,  about  encouraging  the  use  of  water  in  Mexico.  We  are  encouraging 
that  every  day  this  arrangement  continues,  because  those  water  users  will 
secure  water  rights.  Whether  Mexico  has  any  right  or  not,  I  do  not  know1, 
and  we  are  not  here  to  put  them  out  of  business.  We  want  them  to  live  and 
we  want  them  to  prosper,  but  we  do  not  want  them  to  prosi>er  at  the  expense 
of  the  people  of  the  United  States.  They  should  pay  their  part  of  the  cost. 
but  they  will  not  pay  their  part  of  it.  They  will  never  pay  it  until  we  get 
out  of  there.  I  do  not  want  you  to  understand  that  we  wish  to  put  them  out 


126  DEVELOPMENT    OF   LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER   BASIN. 

of  business,  because  we  do  not.  On  the  contrary,  we  want  to  help  them,  but 
we  do  nor  want  to  pay  their  bills. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  would  be  the  method  of  taking  care  of  them? 

Mr.  NIC  KKRSON.  We  could  sell  them  water.  I  talked  to  Secretary  Lane  in 
reference  to  that.  He  said,  "  We  will  not  have  anything  to  do  with  them."  I 
said,  "  We  do  not  have  to  sell  it  to  them  at  a  loss."  and  he  said.  "  No :  sell  it  at 
a  margin."  We  want  a  small  margin  on  account  of  the  amount  of  money  that 
we  have  spent  on  levees,  canals,  etc.,  for  years  past.  It  is  practically  under 
their  control  now.  We  have  no  control  over  it,  and  we  are  getting  into  bad 
trouble.  This  Government  is  getting  into  trouble  by  taking  water  in  there. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Has  our  Government  made  any  effort  to  adjust  this  matter  so 
an  to  protect  you  people? 

Mr.  NKKERSON.  No.  sir:  there  is  no  way  to  do  anything.  Our  Government 
has  nobody  to  deal  with,  because  there  is  no  government  down  there,  or  you 
have  no  recognized  government.  Some  men  say  we  had  better  take  it  up  with 
the  government  down  there,  but  I  say  there  is  no  government  down  there. 

Mr.  SMITH.  There  is  really  no  remedy  for  that  condition  except  by  the  con- 
struction of  this  project. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  That  is  the  only  way. 

Mr.  SMITH.  If  you  build  this  all-American  canal,  you  can  take  out  your  wa- 
ter on  the  American  side. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  SMITH.  What  would  the  Mexican  landowners  do  toward  paying  their 
proportionate  share? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  They  would  have  to  stand  a  proportionate  part  of  the  COST. 
They  could  take  it  out  of  the  river,  or  get  it  through  us.  They  could  get  it 
through  us  at  the  Laguna  Dam,  but  I  doubt  if  the  Government  would  consider 
that  arrangement  with  a  foreign  country.  They  would  have  a  certain  amount 
of  water. 

Mr.  WILLIAMSON.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  you  have  more  water  coming  down  the 
stream  than  can  be  used  in  the  Imperial  Valley. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  No.  sir;  not  all  the  time. 

Mr.  WILLIAMSON.  But  you  would  have  after  you  got  the  dam  built? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes,  sir:  we  would  have  more  water  than  would  be  needed. 
J  am  acquainted  with  the  Arizona  side,  and  there  is  no  more  water  than  \v> 
will  want  under  the  conditions  now.  There  are  certain  months  when  we  are 
short  of  water. 

Mr.  WILLIAMSON.  But  that  is  due  to  the  lack  of  storage? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes,  sir.  There  is  at  least  a  month  when  we  do  not  hav 
enough  water  there.  Our  peak  is  about  7.(KK)  second-feet  in  dry  times,  but  it 
goes  down  as  low  as  2,000  second-feet.  The  Yuma  project  and  the  Imperial 
Valley  do  not  always  have  water  enough.  This  is  something  that  will  protect 
the  Government,  and  it  will  protect  the  Yuma  people  on  the  Arizona  side. 

Mr.  WILLIAMSON*.  You  are  referring  now  to  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam? 

Mr.   NICKERSON.  Yes.   sir. 

Mr.  HAYDF.N.  Without  the  construction  of  a  reservoir  on  the  Colorado  River 
to  store  the  flood  waters  it  would  not  be  worth  while  to  build  the  ail-American 
canal? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  No,  sir;  but  there  is  no  company  that,  could  do  that. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Furthermore,  you  can  not  now  obtain  credit  whereby  you  couM 
raise  the  money  to  build  the  all-American  canal. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  We  tried  to  put  out  a  bond  issue  but  the  bond  men 
would  not  let  us  put  out  bonds,  because,  they  said.  "  You  have  no  storage  reser- 
\oir;  you  get  it  and  then  you  can  do  that." 

Mr.  HAYDEN..  Then  the  construction  of  a  great  reservoir  on  the  Colorado 
River  is  the  real  key  to  the  situation? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  It  takes  care  of  the  whole  situation  :  you  can  not  do  any- 
thing until  you  do  that. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  The  first  thing  necessary  for  the  relief  of  the  Imperial  Valley 
is  to  provide  storage  for  the  flood  waters? 

Mr.   NIOKERSON.  Absolutely. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  only  when  that  is  done  will  it  be  possible  to  go  on  with  the 
other  development? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes.  As  one  of  the  representatives  of  the  Farm  Bureau 
said,  we  have  no  credit.  The  farm  loan  bank  will  not  let  us  have  any  money. 
nor  will  the  banks  in  Los  Angeles.  The  people  come  to  me  and  say.  "  For  God's 
sake.  Nickerson,  if  you  can  get  that  dam  started  it  will  put  credit  in  this  val- 
ley and  all  over  this  country  so  we  can  live." 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX.  127 

Mr.   LIXKHERGEB.   Is   it   not  :i    fact   also.  Mr.   Xickerson,  that  when  you   were 
still  able  to  obtain  money  you  had    to    pay  from    2  to  3  per    cent  more    for  it 
than  people  who  were  borrowing  in  other  sections  of  the  State,  where  they  did 
not  have  this  potential  menace  starring  them  in  the  face  from  year  to  year? 
Mr.   XICKKIJSON.  Yes. 

Mr.  LIXEBEBGER.  You  had  to  pay  10  per  cent  when  people  in  other  sections 
of  the  State  were  paying  7  and  8.  did  yon  not? 

Mr.  XICKKRSON.  I  can  explain  that  to  you  in  a  minute. 

Mr.  LINEHERGKR.  It  is  ii ot  necessary  to  go  'into  details,  but  that  is  the  pen- 
alty you  have  been  bearing  for  years  in  all  of  your  financial  operations,  is  it 
not? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  Yes.  The  attorney  general  and  the  bond  commission  in  the 
State  of  California  say,  "You  have  the  least  bonded  indebtedness;  you  have 
one  of  the  best  districts,  but  your  bonds  are  selling  for  less  than  in  any  district 
in  the  State  of  California."  We  have  sold  them  as  low  as  88  cents,  while  in 
other  districts  they  are  selling  for  above  par. 

Mr.  LINEBEBGER.  What  did  they  bear  when  you  sold  them  at  83? 
Mr.  XICKEKSOX.  Five  and  a  half.  So  you  see  that  is  ruinous.  I  said, 
"  Why?"  He  said,  "Your  flood  protection,  but  whenever  you  take  care  of  that 
it  will  be  different."  I  had  men  tell  me  that  before  I  left.  They  said,  "  We 
have  got  to  have  some  more  money."  but  fortunately  we  are  getting  along  all 
right.  "But,"  he  said,  "you  must  have  your  storage,  your  flood  protection." 
I  said.  "  That  is  absolutely  what  we  are  trying  to  do  now  through  this  bill, 
and  I  believe  we  will  be  able  to  make  the  ]>eople  back  there  believe  it  is  neces- 
sary." 

Mr.   HAYDKX.  Then  your   interest  in   this   legislation     is.   first,    flood    control 
above  and  beyond  all  other  things? 
Mr.  XICKKRSON.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  Second,  with  the  river  regulated,  it  would  be  possible  not  only 
to  furnish  the  lands  you  now  have  under  cultivation  with  an  adequate  supply 
of  water  but  increase  the  irrigable  area  in  the  Imperial  Valley  V 
Mr.  XICKERSON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  But  you  have  comparatively  little  direct  interest  in  the  hydro- 
electric power  that  can  be  developed? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  Yes.  Well,  we  would  need  some  power,  but  on  this  all-Ameri- 
can canal  we  produce  a  lot  of  power :  I  think  we  could  produce  something  like 
50,000  or  60,000  horsepower  through  that  canal,  but  the  main  object,  as  you  say, 
is  storage  and  then  the  getting  out  of  Mexico.  Xow,  as  long  as  you  have  spoken 
about  power — I  live  more  or  less  in  Los  Angeles,  own  property  there,  and  all 
that,  but  nobody  here  has  said  anything  about  the  possibilities  in  Arizona.  I 
am  an  old  Arizonian  myself  and  I  have  a  warm  place  in  my  heart  for  the 
Arizonians.  and  it  is  a  fact  that  they  are  interested  as  much  as  we  are.  Xow, 
they  have  a  lot  of  land  there;  they  have  the  Yuma  project,  or  the  Government 
has,  and  on  which  it  has  si>ent  its  money  and  it  must  be  protected.  Then  there 
is  the  mining  industry  all  over  the  State,  and  I  know  all  about  that.  I  know 
of  mines  laying  idle  for  want  of  power,  and  if  this  power  were  developed  by  the 
Government.  Arizona  would  open  up  mines-  that  have  laid  idle  for  years.  That 
would  put  men  to  work  and  it  would  be  a  revolution  in  that  whole  State.  There 
is  not  anything  on  our  part  of  it  that  we  want  to  handle  or  check;  Arizona  is 
entitled  to  its  part  of  it  just  the  same  as  we  are  and  we  want  to  give  it  to  them. 
We  have  no  cards  stacked;  we  want  to  give  everybody  all  they  are  entitled  to 
in  the  way  of  power  and  protection. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.   Yon  are  familiar  with  the  Yuma  reclamation  project? 
Mr.  XICKERSON.  Y'es,  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDKN.  In  your  opinion  is  there  any  real  danger  that  the  Colorado  Hiver 
might  break  the  levees,  leave  its  channel  and  materially  injure  that  project? 
Mr.  XICKERSON.  It  is  absolutely  liable  to  go  through  the  center  of  it. 

Mr.  HAYDEX.  And  if  the  river  did 

Mr.  XICKERSOX   (interposing).  It  would  absolutely  destroy  the  Yuma  project. 
Mr.  BARHorR.  What  did  the  Yuma  project  cost  the  Government? 
Mr.  HAYDKN.  The  net  cost  of  construction  to  date  is  over  *!>.000.0<M). 
Mr.  XICKKRSON.  I  thought  it  was  about  $12,000,000. 

Mr.  HAYDKN.  So  that  while  Arizona  has  not  heretofore  been  so  greatly  inter- 
ested yet  if  a  break  in  the  Yuma  levee  occurred  and  tht>  Colorado  Uiver  changed 
its  channel  the  injury  would  be  just  as  real  to  Arizona  as  a  similar  break  in  the 
levee  would  be  to  California'.' 


128  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Absolutely ;  and  there  is  no  telling  when  there  be  a  combined 
fllood  in  the  Colorado  and  Gila  Rivers.  Floods  have  come  together  in  those 
rivers,  and  if  the  floods  should  ever  come  there  at  one  time  they  would  im- 
mediately put  the  Yuma  project  off  the  map  and  put  us  off  too.  Of  course,  they 
have  the  San  Carlos  project  which  would  take  care  of  the  flood  waters  of  the 
Gila  River  and  they  would  not  then  amount  to  so  much. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  At  what  time  of  the  year  are  the  floods  the  worst? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  AVell,  right  now:  this  is  the  worst  time.  If  rain  comes  up 
in  the  mountains  and  wets  the  snow  and  ice  they  all  conic  down  in  a  rush  and 
there  is  no  power  that  lives  on  earth  that  can  take  care  of  them. 

Now,  you  were  speaking  about  conditions  on  the  Yuma  project,  in  which 
the  Government  has  its  money  to-day.  Now,  then,  going  back  to  the  levee,  we 
have  a  second  defense  on  the  Volcano  Lake  Levee  that  is  rotten  ;  it  lias  tilled 
up  and  we  have  the  water  cutting  away  from  there  at  the  present  time  and  if 
a  substantial  flood  should  come  that  defense  would  not  do  vis  any  good,  that 
is,  if  the  water  did  break  over  it.  You  see,  it  is  tilled  up  on  the  inside  part  of 
it  and  below  it  makes  a  drop,  and  if  the  water  broke  over  that  and  then  made 
a  drop  it  would  immediately  cut  back.  As  Judge  Swing  told  yon.  it  would 
immediately  cut  back  and  clean  us  off  the  map. 

Mr.  RAKER.  May  I  ask  you  one  question?  Taking  your  knowledge  of  the 
Mexican  situation  and  the  situation  in  the  United  States — this  being  an 
international  stream — would  you  say  that  the  building  of  the  Boulder  Canyon 
Main  for  the  purpose  designated  would  result  in  the  following:  The  elimi- 
nation of  the  canal  going  through  Mexico,  the  building  of  the  All-American 
Canal,  and  the  development  of  electric  power  at  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam,  and 
that  the  matter  between  the  two  Governments  would  be  in  better  shape  to  be 
adjusted  than  at  the  present  time? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Absolutely,  and  protect  the  Government  at  the  same  time. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  There  is  a  call  of  the  House  and  the  committee  will 
have  to  adjourn.  I  would  like  to  learn  the  sense  of  the  committee  with  ref- 
erence to  another  meeting.  It  is  evident  that  Mr.  Nickerson  has  only  partially 
completed  his  statement,  and  several  other  witnesses  are  to  lie  heard.  If  it 
is  agreeable,  we  will  meet  to-morrow  morning  at  half  past  10. 

(Thereupon  the  committee  adjourned  to  meet  Saturday,  June  24.  1922.  at 
10.30  o'clock  a.  m. ) 


COMMITTEE  ox  IRRIGATIOX  OF  ARID  LANDS. 

HOUSE    OF    REPRESENTATIVES. 

Sat  H  r^aii.  June  ^',.  1(.\22. 

The  committee  met  at  lO.o.l  a.  m..  Hon.  Nicholas  .T.  Sinnott  presiding. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  The  committee  will  come  to  order. 

Mr.  SWING.  Mr.  Chairman,  before  Mr.  Nickerson  resumes  his  statement  I  just 
received  in  the  mail  this  morning  a  letter  from  Secretary  Fall  containing  copies 
of  telegrams  received  from  Bisbee.  Ariz.,  relating  to  the  Girand  project,  which 
is  located  on  the  Colorado  River  just  above  Boulder  Canyon  and  is  considered 
a  competitor  to  that  project:  also  a  wire  protesting  the  legislation  now  before 
you  and  an  answer  to  the  same,  which  I  think  ought  to  go  into  the  record  first 
as  typical  of  one  of  the  principal  objections  being  made,  and  an  answer  to  the 
same.  [Reading:! 

JI-XE  23.  1922. 

MY  PEAK  CONGRESSMAN:  I  am  herewith  attaching  for  your  information  tele- 
grams received  from  the  Bisbee  Chamber  of  Commerce  protesting  against  the 
Swing-Johnson  bill  and  insisting  upon  granting  power  license  to  Girand  and 
associates. 

I  am  also  attaching  my  telegraphic  response  to  same. 

I  am  communicating  with  the  Arizona  Senators  and  Representative,  as  well 
as  Senator  Shortridge  and  the  California  Representatives,  inclosing  them  copies 
of  this  letter  and  telegrams  referred  to. 
Very  respectfully. 

ALBERT  B.  FALL.  Secretary. 

Hon.  PHIL  P.  SWING.  M.  C. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX.  129 

[Telegram.] 

BISBEE,  ARIZ..  June  .2.2.  V.>.2.2. 
ALBERT  B.  FALL. 

Secretary  of  Interior,  Washington,  D.  C.: 

We,  the  undersigned,  want  Arizona  to  obtain  an  immediate  development  of 
power  on  the  Colorado  River.  The  same  is  immediately  necessary  in  the 
reclamation  of  thousands  of  acres  of  land  by  pumping  and  also  for  present 
industries.  The  Girand  project,  No.  121,  berore  tae  Federal  Power  Commis- 
sion, will  give  Arizona  that  immediate  power  and  also  State  taxes  therefrom, 
and  we  urge  that  the  license  be  issued  at  once.  Objections  from  southern 
California  to  the  Girand  project  have  been  filed,  but  upon  an  erroneous  idea 
that  the  project  will  interfere  with  Boulder  Canyon.  We  as-k  that  the  license 
issue  as  provided  by  law.  Having  confidence  in  your  fairness,  we  rely  upon 
your  aid  in  the.  matter  and  respectfully  request  a  reply  by  wire  giving  your 
views. 

BISBEE  CHAMBER  OF  COMMERCE. 


[Telegram.] 

BISBEE.  ARIZ.,  June  22. 
ALBERT  B.  FALL, 

Secretary  of  Interior,  Wash-in  utvu.  D.  C.: 

We.  the  undersigned,  are  unalterably  opposed  to  the  passage  of  the  Swing- 
Johnson  bill  for  construction  at  Boulder  Canyon.  It  discriminates  against 
Arizona  by  providing  for  the  diversion  of  waters  upon  California  lands  alone 
and  also  prevents  Arizona  from  developing  any  power  on  the  Colorado  River 
either  as  a  State  or  through  private  enterprise,  but  allowing  the  upper  basin 
States  that  privilege.  We  are  urging  our  Representatives  to  use  every  honor- 
able mean?  to  defeat  this  measure,  and  we  are  cooperating  with  other  organiza- 
tions toward  that  end.  Having  confidence  in  your  fairness,  we  rely  upon  your 
aid  in  the  matter  and  respectfully  request  a  reply  by  wire  giving  your  views. 

BISBEE  CHAMBER  OF  COMMERCE. 


Telegram.] 

DEPARTMENT  OF  THK  INTERIOR.  Jnm-  .2.1.  1U.22. 
BISREE  CHAMBER  OF  COMMERCE. 

Bisbee.  Ariz.: 

Receipt  your  two  telegrams  23d  acknowledged.  Referring  your  declare;! 
opposition  Swing-Johnson  bill  construction  Boulder  Canyon.  I  can  IK  t  agree 
that  it  discriminates  against  Arizona.  Yuma  project  on  the  Colorado  River 
is  protected  and  has  already  cost  this  Government  more  than  $3.600,000.  Ari- 
zona has  been  especially  favored  in  the  advance  of  Government  funds:  also 
in  the  amount  of  more  than  .S10..1OO.OOO  on  the  Roosevelt-Salt  River  project,  a 
total  of  more  than  $16200.<XK).  Returns  from  public-land  sales  to  close  last 
fiscal  year  show  receipts  from  Arizona  (Lj900,000  or  expenditures  in  excess 
receipts  MH.i  per  cent.  Receipts  from  public-land  sales  in  California  total 
$7.000.000.  and  expenditures  upon  California  lands  by  Government  a  little  more 
than  $3.000.000.  or  <  nly  4.">  per  cent  of  receipts.  Pending  legislation  proposes 
construction  dam  and  development  water  power  by  Government  of  United 
States  and  would  allow  allocation  and  sale  of  same  anywhere  in  the  State 
of  Arizona,  with  no  preference  rights  to  any  portion  or  district  of  the  State 
of  California  over  Arizona.  Bill  does  not  discriminate  as  to  water  power  or 
sales  thereof  to  any  ether  States  as  against  Arizona.  Bill  does  not  propose 
to  prohibit  any  other  construction  under  the  law  by  Girand  or  his  associates 
or  by  the  Southern  California  Kdison  Co.  or  their  associates  or  anyone  else. 
but  does  give  priority  rights  to  the  Government  of  the  United  States  in  the 
hydroelectric  development  over  any  private  parties  whomsoever,  whether  citi- 
zens «f  Arizona.  California,  or  of  other  States.  Under  authority  act  of  Con- 
gress. 1020.  I  have  reported  in  favor  construction  by  Government  Boulder 
Canyon  Dam  and  participation  therein  if  desired  by  any  States  desiring  allo- 
cation of  power.  This  report  made  under  the  direction  of  Congress  of  the 


130  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    BASIX. 

United  States.  As  member  of  the  Water  Power  Commission,  I  have  opposed 
and  must  continue  to  oppose  the  granting  of  license  to  Girand  and  associates, 
or  any  other  private  parties  of  power  permits  on  Colorado  River,  until  Con- 
gress has  opportunity  to  act  through  adoption  Swing-Johnson  bill  or  other 
legislation. 

Boulder  Canyon  Dam  will  prevent  or  assist  in  preventing  floods  destroying 
Arizona  territory  and  necessity  for  requests  through  Arizona  Senators  and 
Representatives  of  gratuity  appropriations  of  public  funds  for  such  protection. 

FALL,  Secretary. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  Who  signed  the  former  telegram  there  protesting? 

Mr.  SWING.  Both  of  them  are  by  the  Bishee  Chamber  of  Commerce. 

I  also  want  to  file  in  connection  with  that  at  this  time,  w'thout  reading, 
a  report  prepared  by  a  former  Arizonan,  I  think  at  present  a  citizen  of  Arizona 
but  who  is  occupying  a  position  in  the  Government,  in  which  he  shows  the 
tremendous  benefits  that  will  flow  to  the  State  of  Arizona  as  a  result  of  the 
development  of  this  project  provided  for  in  the  legislation  now  before  you. 

I  ask  permission  that  this  also  may  go  into  the  record. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Without  objection  it  may  go  in. 

( The  paper  referred  to  follows  : ) 

DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR. 

BUREAU  OF  MIXES. 
Wciahhifffon,  Jinie    L>.    !!>.!>. 
Hon.  PHILIP  D.  SWING, 

Hwtxe  of  Repre.xcutatire*.  W(ixhi)i(i1on.  D.  C. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  SAVING  :  You  have  asked  me  to  give  an  opinion  of  the  benefits 
likely   to  be  derived  by   the  mining  industry  of  the  Southwest  from   electric- 
power  development  as  contemplated  under  the  Colorado  River  project. 
The  question  naturally  divides  itself  into  the  following  considerations : 
(a)   Urgent  necessity  for  protecting  established  communities  such  as  Yuma 
and  Imperial  Valley  irrigation  distr'cts  against  flood  menace. 
(6)   General  industrial  benefit  to  the  Southwest, 
(c)    Specific  benefit  to  the  mining  industry- 
Mining  is  to-day,  and  probably  will  continue  to  be  for  the  next  decade,  the 
dominant  industry  of  Arizona,  southwestern  New  Mexico,  and  southern  Nevada. 
The  problems  of  the  mining  industry  in  this  section  may  be  summed  up  under 
three  principal  heads;  transportation,  power,  living  conditions.     I  will  briefly 
consider  these  problems  in  the  order  named. 

Transportation. — The  State  of  Arizona  is  peculiarly  shut  in.  The  nearest 
ports  are  Galveston  on  the  east  and  Los  Angeles  on  the  west,  with  high  freight 
rates  from  Arizona  points  to  either  port,  which  react  unfavorably  on  the  cost 
of  power,  the  cost  of  supplies,  and  on  general  living  conditions.  A  solution  of 
this  problem  is  seen  in  the  completion  of  the  Tucson.  Cornelia,  and  Gila  Bend 
Railway  extension  plans  from  Ajo.  the  present  terminus,  to  the  Gulf  of  Cali- 
fornia, a  distance  of  only  97  miles.  This  would  give  Arizona  a  direct  freight 
outlet  to  the  sea.  Unfortunately  the  needs  of  the  mining  industry  alone  do  not 
furnish  sufficient  urge  to  capital  to  undertake  this  development. 

Power. — Mining  operations  in  this  section,  both  large  and  small,  are  to-day 
seriously  hampered  by  the  increasing  cost  of  coal,  fuel  oil,  and  gasoline;  the 
increase  in  power  costs  is  a  matter  of  grave  concern  to  the  mine  operator. 
Cheap  and  dependable  hydroelectric  power  will  stimulate  prospecting  and 
development;  it  will  cheapen  metal  production  in  a  large  territory  which  dur- 
ing the  year  1918  produced  metals  to  the  value  of  over  a  quarter  of  a  billion 
dollars;  it  will  put  the  small  producer  on  equal  terms  with  the  large  producer 
in  the  matter  of  power  costs ;  it  will  open  up  possibilities  of  the  electrometal- 
lurgical  treatment  of  low-grade  ores  which  are  at  present  unavailable  on  ac- 
count of  high  cost  of  steam  or  oil,  generated  electric  power,  isolation,  and 
other  handicaps. 

Living  conditions. — Living  conditions,  and  particularly  the  cost  of  living, 
are  affected  largely  by  the  conditions  of  settlement  and  of  farm  development, 
and  by  both  highway  and  railroad  transportation  development.  Arizona  may 
be  considered  as  being  very  sparsely  settled — which  makes  for  high  per 
capita  development  cost  for  public  utilities  and  high  maintenance  and  interest 
charges.  Statistics  furnished  by  the  Agricultural  Department  indicate  that 
less  than  5  per  cent  of  the  potential  tillable  land  of  the  State  is  under  culti- 
vation. The  principal  requisite  for  further  development  and  utilization  of  till- 


DEVELOP  Ml-;  XT    OF    LOWER   COLORADO    RIVER    BASIX.  131 

aide  laud  is  power  for  pumping  water — and  this  calls  for  abundant,  dependable, 
flexible,  and  reasonably  priced  electric  power. 

True  conservation  of  the  Nation's  mineral  resources  demands  that  the 
mineral  deposits  should  be  developed  and  worked  with  the  greatest  economy 
and  thoroughness.  This  can  only  be  done  with  adequate  highway,  railroad,  and 
power  facilities.  Tins  in  turn  demands  enormous  investments  in  improvements 
of  a  permanent  character  which  will  endure  long  after  the  mineral  deposits 
are  on  the  wane.  It  must  be  remembered  that  a  mine  is  to  he  regarded  as  a 
wasting  asset.  Therefore,  it  is  of  importance  to  the  mining  industry  that  other 
indusiries  lie  developed  to  fully  utilize  these  transportation  and  power  fa- 
cilities, and  thus  maintain  the  volume  of  business  and  commerce  of  the  territory 
as  mineral  production  declines. 

The  Colorado  River  power  project  therefore  is  of  vital  importance  to  the 
mining  industry  of  this  section.  Not  only  will  it  adequately  supply  the  power 
needs  of  the  mines,  but  it  promises  to  solve  fully  ami  satisfactorily  the  other 
major  problems.  Many  of  the  large  mine  operators  of  the  State  have  a  vision 
of  relief  to  come  in  the  form  of  an  industrial  development  in  the  State  imme- 
diately following  upon  the  assurance  of  the  availability  of  dependable  electric 
power,  which  development  will  insure  enough  freight  in  the  form  of  valuable 
raw  material  such  as  copper,  cotton,  rubber,  and  other  agricultural  products. 
to  warrant  extension  of  the  railroad  from  Ajo  to  the  Gulf. 

As  indicating  the  stability  of  the  mining  industry  of  the  State  and  the 
initiative  of  the  mine  operators.  I  may  point  to  the  recently  completed  ex- 
plosives plant  of  the  Apache  Power  Co.  built  by  the  mine  oi>erators  to  supply 
the  local  explosives  demand.  The  next  logical  progressive  step  is  to  refine  and 
fabricate  Arizona  copper  prior  to  shipment  by  water.  Apparently  the  two 
essentials  are  a  satisfactory  freight  outlet  to  water  and  electric  power. 

Eliminating  from  consideration  the  increasing  power  demands  to  be  ex- 
pected from  southern  California,  the  principal  consumer  of  power  from  the 
Colorado  Kiver  project  would  for  the  immediate  future  be  the  mining  industry. 
There  is  an  immediate  market  at  the  mines  for  at  least  73.000  electric 
horsepower,  and  the  demand  may  be  considerably  larger. 

In  conclusion,  I  desire  to  emphasize  the  conviction  that  the  assurance  of 
such  power  service  will  unquestionably  launch  an  industrial  development 
which  would  react  most  favorably  upon  the  mining  industry  in  a  way  difficult 
to  measure  in  dollars.  This  indirect  help  may  prove  to  be  fully  as  important 
as  the  more  tangible  direct  help  to  come  from  the  availability  of  power  for 
use  at  the  mines. 

Very  truly  yours, 

F.    J.    RUI.KY.    Art  I  nil    ]>ir>'ct'jf. 
For  H.    FOSTER   BAIN.    Diwtor. 

STATEMENT     OF    MB.     J.    S.     NICKERSON,    PRESIDENT    IMPERIAL 
VALLEY  IRRIGATION  DISTRICT. 

Mr.  NICKKKSON.  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen  of  the  committee.  I  want  to 
call  your  attention  to  this  river  that  is  shown  here  [indicating  Colorado  Uiver 
on  mapl.  I'p  here  is  our  intake  from  the  river.  The  banks  along  there  are 
fairly  good  and  the  river  is  about  twelve  or  fourteen  hundred  feet  wide.  Now 
immediately  when  it  gets  down  here  it  divides. 

Mr.  KAKKU.  Mr.  Xickerson,  if  you  would  describe  what  that  is  and  say  the 
direction  and  give  the  name,  it  will  read  fine  in  the  record  but  the  way  you 
are  putting  it  a  person  reading  it  will  not  get  any  information  at  all  from  it. 

Mr.  NICKKKSON.  I  will  say  that  river  is  at  our  headgate,  where  we  take  the 
water  out.  twelve  or  fourteen  hundred  feet  wide:  then  after  yon  Lret  down  here 
about  eight  to  twelve  miles,  the  river  begins  to  spread  out  and  meander,  on 
account  of  the  water  when  it  loses  its  velocity  and  volume  the  silt  begins  to 
settle  and  the  water  spreads  and  that  causes  the  river  to  meander,  and  our 
great  trouble  is  from  there  down  here  [indicating!  because  it  is  up  on  a  ridge. 

Now  right  here,  at  this  place  <>n  the  Arizona  side,  the  Government  levee,  the 
river  broke  in  last  year  on  account  of  this  meandering  and  widening  of  the 
river.  That  is  17  miles  from  Yuma  on  the  levee  of  the  Government  |"  indicating). 

Now  we  go  on  farther  down  here. 

Mr.    KAKKK.  That   is  south  V 

Mr.  NICKKUSON.  That  is  south:  we  are  going  south.  We  i_ret  down  here  about 
'2~i  miles  and  there  we  have  cut  the  river  into  what  is  known  as  Bee  River. 
We  have  made  a  cut  there  that  cost  sn.'.n.iHM)  this  year.  We  have  spent  on  a 


132  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

railroad  here  about  $100.000  in  order  to  get  it  down  to  this  Bee  River  change. 

Now  all  this  part  of  it  has  a  tendency  to  work  over  in  this  direction,  toward 
the  Imperial  Valley,  and  yon  can  see  from  the  map  here  the  way  the  river 
runs:  it  meanders  from  one  side  to  the  other  because  there  are  no  banks  and 
it  has  no  grade  and  it  just  runs  from  one  side  to  the  other. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  is  north  and  west? 

.Mi'.  XICKERSOX.   It  runs  north  and  then  west.  yes.  sir. 

Mr.  SIXXOTT.  Where  is  the  Mexican  line  there? 

Mr.  XICKERSOX.  Way  up  here,  north.  There  is  the  Mexican  line  (indicating 
on  map]. 

Mr.  RAKER.  How  far  is  this  Bee  River  from  the  Mexican  boundary  line? 

Mr.  XICKERSOX.  From  our  boundary  line  it  is  about  25  miles  t<>  where  we 
are  making  that  change  in  there.  There  is  where  we  made  our  tight  this 
year  and  we  have  held  it  so  far,  but  I  want  to  show  you  gentlemen  it  is  all 
temporary  work  we  are  doing  there,  fighting  for  life  to  get  through  from  one 
year  to  the  other. 

Mr.   HrnsPETH.  That   is   in  Mexico? 

Mr.  XICKERSOX.  Yes,  sir.  all  this  money  that  we  have  spent — we  have  spent 
over  $12,000.000  in  the  last  four  or  five  years,  and  I  have  got  itemized  state- 
ments to  show  that. 

Mr.    HUDSPETH.  How   much    money? 

.Mr.  XICKERSOX.  $12,000,000.  I  have  got  an  itemized  statement  that  I  am 
going  to  file  with  yon  showing  that. 

Mr.  SINXOTT.  That  is  money  you  have  spent  in  Mexico? 

Mr.  NICKERSOX.  Yes.  sir :  in  Mexico. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  To  protect  your  water  supply? 

Mr.  XICKERSOX.  Taking  our  water  through  there  and  buying  machinery  and 
dredging  canals,  and  so  forth,  at  the  expense  of  the  people  on  the  American 
side  of  the  line,  and  the  people  on  the  Mexican  side  just  pay  for  the  water 
but  do  not  pay  for  the  expense,  and  we  have  to  go  down  through  their  country. 
Xow.  you  see  here  is  a  canal  that  we  run  down  into  their  country  [indicating]. 
We  run  out  to  here,  to  Volcano  Lake,  Black  Butte,  and  then  we  run  back 
into  the  United  States.  We  maintain  all  that  and  the  levee,  take  care  of  it 
and  sell  them  the  water  at  the  same  price  that  we  sell  it  on  the  American 
side,  but  they  do  not  pay  the  maintenance  of  it ;  then  we  have  to  tax  the  people 
on  the  American  side  to  make  up  the  deficiency  from  the  water  sales,  which 
amounts  to  $7  per  acre  per  year  on  the  American  side,  and  on  the  Mexican 
side  it  only  costs  them  $2.50. 

Mr.  RAKER.  The  levee  you  speak  of  is  designated  on  the  map  as  Volcano 
Lake  Levee? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  Yes,  sir :  and  we  have  a  canal  running  right  along  there 
and  running  back  into  the  United  States. 

Here  is  aonther  proposition  I  want  to  show  you.  If  we  take  this  water 
through  on  the  American  side  you  can  see  the  length  of  mileage  we  will  cut 
out  and  the  amount  of  evaporation. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  What  is  the  difference  in  the  mileage  between  the  straight 
one  and  the  Mexican  one? 

Mr.  XICKERSOX.  Well,  there  would  be 

Mr.  STXNOTT   (interposing).  Two  sides  of  the  triangle  against  one? 

Mr.  XICKERSOX.  Yes,  sir;  just  about. 

Mr.  SINNOTT.  Do  you  know  the  mileage? 

Mr.  XICKERSOX.  Xot  exactly  :  I  do  not.  We  have  got  135  miles  of  canals, 
main  canals  through  which  we  deliver  this  water  in  Mexico. 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  Do  you  know  the  distance  of  the  American  caii.-il.  what  ir 
would  be? 

Mr.  XICKERSOX.  It  is  on  that  paper  folder. 

Mr.  HERRICK.  If  we  build  the  all-American  canal  those  canals  in  Mexico 
will  remain,  but  they  will  not  deliver  water  across  into  the  United  States  any 
more :  is  that  it  ? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  That  is  it. 

Mr.  HERKICK.  And  that  will  enable  you  to  make  those  fellows  come  Through 
with  some  maintenance,  will  it? 

Mr.  XICKERSOX.  Well,  we  want  to  give  them  the  water  up  here  [indicating]. 
We  pay  for  the  canals  and  everything  and  we  don't  want  to  take  the  water 
away  from  them :  we  do  not  want  to  do  anything  unfair,  but  we  do  want 
them  to  pay  their  proportionate  part  and  take  the  water  that  belongs  to  them 
and  take  care  of  it.  but  not  at  our  expense. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLOEADO   RIVER  BASIN.  133 

Mr.  HUDSPETH.  If  you  built  this  all-American  canal,  Mr.  Nickerson,  would 
it  be  necessary  to  keep  any  maintenance  on  this  other  canal  in  Mexico? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  No ;  we  would  not  be  doing  any  business  there.  If  they 
had  any  water  coming  to  them  they  could  take  it  right  here  at  the  time.  And 
as  a  staled  yesterday,  we  are  carrying  water  in  there  and  they  are  develop  ng 
land  at  the  rate  of  25,000  acres  a  year.  You  are  encouraging  them  to  do  that 
and  giving  them  an  arbitrary  right  to  the  water  by  using  it. 

I  just  want  to  show  you  the  conditions  that  we  are  facing,  and  why  anyone 
would  object  and  would  not  get  in  and  try  to  remedy  it  I  can't  understand. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Supposing  the  American  canal  was  built;  then  we  still  would 
have  this  canal  running  across  here  marked  "Alamo  Canal"? 

Mr.   NICKEKSON.  Yes,    sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  also  the  levee  known  as  the  Volcano  Lake  Levee,  coming 
down  here  to  Volcano  Lake? 

Mr.   NICKERSON.  Yes. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  then  the  Solfatara  Canal,  which  irrigates  land  in  Lower 
California  on  the  Mexican  side,  which  could  be  irrigated  by  those  people  and 
they  would  be  protected  from  this  flood  and  silt  that  now  comes  down. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  The  canal  is  there  and  we  would  possibly  have  to  help  them 
some,  you  know,  in  controlling  the  water,  but  we  would  not  have  to  carry  our 
water  through  there  and  maintain  canals  and  give  them1  free  transportation. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  I  am  getting  at  is  that  nobody  would  be  able  to  say,  if 
they  looked  at  the  situation  fully,  that  you  would  be  doing  an  injustice  to  any- 
body ;  it  would  be  a  help  to  them  as  well  as  an  absolute  saving  of  yourselves  on 
the  California  side. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Well,  I  would  not  say  it  would  be  a  help  to  them.  It  would 
not  be  a  financial  help.  The  Government  could  say  how  much  water  they  had 
coming  and  give  it  to  them. 

Mr.  RAKER.  If  they  are  just  paying  for  the  vahie  of  the  water,  irrespective 
of  the  maintenance  and  upkeep  and  flood  control,  wouldn't  it  be  an  advantage 
to  those  people  in  Mexico  as  well,  if  they  are  entitled  to  any  water? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Sure  they  would  get  the  benefit  of  the  flood  control,  which 
they  are  holding  their  hands  up  now  for. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Mr.  Nickerson,  will  those  Mexican  land  owners  con- 
tribute in  a  financial  way  to  the  construction  of  this  Boulder  Canyon  Reser- 
voir? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  No.  I  do  not  think  so,  and  I  do  not  think  the  Government 
would  take  it.  or  let  them  come  in  as  a  partner  anyway.  They  would  get  the 
benefit  of  it ;  it  would  increase  the  value  of  their  land  at  least  $50  an  acre, 
possibly  $100. 

Mr.  HERRICK.  Is  this  land  here  worth  anything  to  anybody  [Indicating]  ? 

Mr.  NTCKKKSON.  Yes,  that  is  good  land  if  you  keep  the  water  off  of  it. 

Mr.  HKRRICK.  It  is  nothing  but  a  swamp  now. 

.Mr.  HAYDEN.  Unless  there  was  adequate  storage  provided  on  the  Colorado 
River,  even  if  the  ail-American  canal  was  built  you  would  still  have  to  go 
down  into  Mexico  to  maintain  the  levees? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  To  a  certain  extent.  There  would  not  be  much,  because  the 
flood  water  would  be  taken  care  of. 

Mr.  IIAYDKX.  You  evidently  misunderstood  my  question.  I  said  in  case  the 
Boulder  Canyon  dam,  that  you  advocate,  or  other  storage  on  the  Colorado 
River  was  not  provided,  then  the  construction  of  the  all-Amcrican  canal  would 
merely  give  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  control  of  the  irrigating  water 
but  you  would  still  have  to  negotiate  with  Mexico  every  year  over  the  levee 
problem.  The  important  thing  is  storage  of  the  flood  waters,  and  the  all-Ameri- 
ca n  canal  is  of  secondary  importance  to  your  people. 

Mr.  NICKKKSON.  Storage  is  first,  water  second,  and  power  third.  That  is  the 
way  we  figure  it. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Do  you  think  if  they  had  the  all-American  canal  there 
would  be  such  a  quantity  of  water  go  down  into  Mexico  as  to  make  it  danger-- 
ous  to  Imperial  Valley? 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  The  amount  of  water  in  the  Colorado  River  at  flood  stage  is 
so  great  that  the  ail-American  canal  would  only  take  a  very  small  part  of 
it.  The  flood  menace  would  continue  to  exist  just  as  it  docs  now.  and  that 
would  compel  negotiations  with  Mexico  each  y<i»ir  regarding  the  levee.  With 
that  as  a  club  the  Mexicans  could  probably  force  the  people  in  the  Imperial 
Valley  to  make  concessions  to  them  ;  bxit  if  the  floods  first  are  controlled 
then  it  would  not  be  necessary  for  the  people  of  the  Imperial  Valley  to  go 


1,34      DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIX. 

into  Mexico  to  maintain  the  levees.  If  the  all-Ameriean  canal  is  built  the 
water  for  the  irrigation  of  Imperial  Valley  can  be  transported  entirely 
through  the  United  States  and  the  Imperial  Irrigation  District  can  cut  com- 
pletely loose  from  Mexico.  There  would  then  be  no  compulsion  of  any  kind 
on  the  people  of  the  Imperial  Valley  to  do  anything.  Rut  storage  must  come 
tirst. 

Mr.  LIXEHERGER.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Hayden  one  ques- 
tion, if  I  may. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  suggest  that  you  let  Mr.  Nickerson  finish,  because  he  has  only 
a  little  time  left,  and  then  we  can  ask  these  questions  of  each  other  after  that. 

Mr.  LIXEBERGER.   It  is  very  pertinent  to  the  question. 

Mr.  SWING.  He  has  only  five  minutes  left. 

Mr.  SIXNOTT.  Mr.  Nickerson.  how  do  you  care  for  your  surplus  and  drain- 
age water  from  the  all- American  canal? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  We  have  the  Alamo  Canal.  We  have  the  Alamo  liiver  that 
runs  right  down  through  our  territory  through  the  Imperial  Valley  into  the 
Salt  on  Sea.  And  they  have  got  a  lot  of  water  that  runs  in  there  too.  irrigat- 
ing their  part  of  it,  waste  water  that  runs  in  there. 

Mr.  Hrusi'KTH.  Mr.  Xickerson,  I  do  not  understand  Mr.  Hayden's  conten- 
tion. Probably  I  do  not  understand  the  topography  of  the  country  there  and 
how  that  water  runs.  Now,  I  have  understood  that  if  you  construct  your 
American  canal  we  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  Mexico;  it  would  not  he 
necessary  to  maintain  the  canal  down  there.  Now,  where  would  you  get  your 
overflow  from  the  Mexican  side?  Does  it  run  back  into  the  United  States? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Oh,  yes;  the  overflow — if  there  was  any  flood  water  come 
over  our  levees  it  would  go  right  down  into  the  Unite;!  States. 

Mr.  Hrusi'ETH.  I  understand  now.  I  did  not  understand,  and  I  wanted  to 
get  that  clear. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Now,  you  were  speaking  about  the  canal. 

This  canal  is  shorter,  and  it  opens  up  a  lot  of  land — several  thousand  acres  of 
land  up  in  there — and  that  will  go  to  the  soldier  boys.  And  it  will  be  very 
valuable  land.  There  is  land  like  that  worth  $1,000  an  acre.  I  want  to  say.  that 
is  adapted  to  fruit,  grapefruit,  and  grapes  in  the  valley  now.  There  is  very 
little  of  that  kind  of  land  in  the  valley,  and  some  of  it  is  worth  $1,000  an  acre 
that  was  put  into  grapes  three  years  old. 

Rut  the  flood  water  is  the  keynote  to  the  whole  situation — taking  care  of  the 
flood  water.  Mexico  will  get  water  just  the  same.  We  don't  want  to  take  any- 
thing away  from  them.  As  I  tell  you,  it  will  benetit  their  land  from  $")0  to  $100 
an  acre.  The  flood  water  is  the  tirst  thing. 

Here  is  our  canal  [indicating  I  :  here  are  the  headings,  concrete  headings  that 
we  put  in  there  at  a  cost  of  from  s.~>0.000  to  $10O.ooo.  They  can  have  them. 
We  have  got  to  go  off  and  leave  them.  And  they  can  get  their  water:  we  do  not 
hinder  them  in  the  least  in  any  way. 

Mr.  SWING.  Suppose  you  put  before  the  committee  the  actual  situation  here 
with  reference  to  that  matter. 

Mr.  NICKKKSON.  There  is  Volcano  Lake;  there  is  our  main  protection  from  the 
water  coming  in  [indicating!.  There  are  hot  mud  geysers  going  up  into  the  air 
there  two  or  three  hundred  feet  high  from  this  volcanic  eruption. 

Mr.  SWING.  Are  those  levees  on  both  sides  of  our  canal? 

Mr.  NICKKKSOX.  Yes,  sir:  it  is  built  right  across  them,  and  it  is  built  out  of  a 
very  light  silt.  It  is  the  silt  that  has  settled  there,  and  it  doesn't  make  a  good 
levee.  I  am  a  construction  man.  I  have  followed  that  business  all  my  life — 
waterworks,  levees,  railroads,  and  everything  of  that  kind — and  I  know  what 
we  are  talking  about.  The  tirst  year  they  are  built  they  are  pretty  fair,  but  as 
soon  as  they  dry  they  contract,  and  then  cracks  come  in  them,  and  the  water 
goes  right  through  them.  The  soil  is  so  light  yon  can't  make  good  levees  out  of 
it  at  all.  Now,  we  are  subject  to  that  difficulty. 

On  the  lower  side  of  that  levee  it  is  filled  up  inside  about  10  feet.     If  that 

•did  break  there  would  be  a  drop  of  about  10  feet  and  it  would  just  start  to 

cutting  back,  and  I  think  I  mentioned  yesterday  it  would  cut  right  back  up 

through  into  Yuma  and  possibly  destroy  the  La  gun  a  Dam.     There  are  lots  of 

engineers  who  think  it  is  possible  for  it  to  do  that. 

Mr.  HTJDSPETH.  Where  is  Yuma? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Up  in  here  f  indicating]. 

Mr.  SWING.  You  have  been  on  this  levee  many  times  during  flood  seasons. 
have  you  not? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes,  sir. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX.  135 

Mr.  SWING.  What  amount  of  water  Ls  there  pressing  against  that  levee  during 
the  high-water  season?  How  far  back  have  you  seen  that  water V 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  It  will  run  clear  back  to  the  Arizona  line.  That  will  be  20  to 
25  miles  of  flood  water.  It  runs  in  here,  and  then  it  gets  up  to  8  or  10  feet 
and  then  it  creates  a  grade  and  that  makes  it  go  south.  The  grade  to  the 
west  into  Imperial  Valley  is  greater  than  it  is  to  the  south,  but  after  the  water 
gets  in  and  backs  up,  it  goes  to  the  south. 

Mr.  SWING.  How  deep  is  the  water  here  where  it  backs  up  against  the  canal? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  It  is  12  to  16  feet  deep,  and  I  have  seen  it  go  clear  over  the 
top  of  it. 

Mr.  RAKER.  In  ordinary  stages  of  that  water  where  is  the  main  channel  of 
that  river,  commencing  from  your  intake  there  and  running  on  down  till  it 
strikes  the  Gulf  of  Lower  California? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  It  runs  down  through  here  and  runs  against  this  levee  here 
[indicating], 

Mr.  RAKER.  Before  the  levee  was  there  it  must  have  run  some  place;  where 
did  it  run? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  It  ran  promiscuously  over  in  this  country  [indicating].  The 
old  channel  is  here  and  then  it  changed. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Xow  you  saw  it  before  they  put  that  levee  in  there,  did  you  not? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  Xo :  I  did  not — not  that  particular  part  of  it. 

Mr.  SWING.  There  was  a  very  small  levee  there  formerly.  3  or  4  feet  high. 
How  high  is  it  now? 
.    .Mr.  XICKERSON.  It  is  about  15  feet 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  do  not  quite  get  my  question.  Before  the  Imperial  Valley 
people  put  this  dam  in.  and  their  ditch,  and  before  any  work  was  done  toward 
turning  water  into  Imjierial  Valley  it  did  not.  overflow  nor  was  there  any 
high  water:  where  did  the  water  run,  and  designate  it  on  the  map,  if  you  can. 
Then  I  want  to  ask  you  a  couple  of  other  questions. 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  I  went  down  the  old  channel  here  [indicating]. 

Mr.  SWING.  Marked  on  the  map  "Channel  of  the  Colorado  River  prior  to 
1908." 

Mr.   XICKKRSON.   Yes. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Xow,  we  have  got  that.  What  prevents  the  water  from  running 
in  the  old  channel  you  have  up  there  by  the  Bee  River? 

Mr.  XICKEKSON.  It  is  filled  up  with  sand  now. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Xow  let  me  ask  you  this  iiuestion — the  engineers  have  made 
statements  here,  and  of  course,  they  ought  to  know  something  about  it — tak- 
ing the  statement  of  my  colleague.  Mr.  Hayden,  if  the  reservoir  is  put  in  at — 
what  is  the  place  on  the  Gila  River? 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  The  San  Carlos  Dam. 

Mr.  RAKEI:.  Take  ibis  statement  that  tluit  will  hold  back  the  flood  waters, 
and  take  the  statement  of  the  engineers  and  also  of  Mr.  Hoover  that  the 
Boulder  Canyon  Dam  alone  will  bold  the  flood  water  for  at  least  two  years  and 
a  half,  if  not  three  years,  will  you  tell  the  committee  what  there  is  there  to 
prevent,  or  what  there  is  there  that  would  cause  the  destruction  of  the  Vol- 
cano Lake  levee  and  these  other  works,  and  why  the  river  could  not  be  con- 
trolled by  putting  it  back  into  its  old  channel? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  There  isn't  any  reason  in  the  world.     It  can  be  put  back. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  If  the  flood  waters  from  the  (iila  and  Colorado  are  controlled 
and  can  be  controlled  by  these  two  dams  from  one  to  three  years,  couldn't  the 
old  channel  there  by  the  Bee  River  be  easily  be  put  back  in  the  old  channel 
and  maintained  at  very  moderate  expense? 

Mr.  XICKKRSON.  Well,  it  can  be  maintained  where  it  is  easier  than  it  can 
be  put  back  in  the  old  channel.  It  could  be  done,  but  who  is  going  to  pay  for  it? 

Mr.  RAKEU.  I  am  not  asking  about  who  is  going  to  pay  for  it;  I  am  asking 
if  that  is  not  quite  possible? 

Mr.  XICKERSON.  It  is  possible.  You  can  put  that  river  anywhere  after  you 
get  the  water  controlled.  I  know  that  San  Carlos  canal :  the  dam  site  is  a  good 
one  and  it  ought  to  be  put  in. 

Mr.  RAKER.  If  the  floods  in  the  river  are  thus  controlled  from  two  to  three 
years,  and  only  the  ordinary  Hood  would  come  down  to  the  Ynma  Dam,  what 
would  be  your  judgment  as  to  The  amount  of  expense  that  would  entail  to  throw 
the  river  down  in  here  [indicating],  from  where  it  is  a  well-defined  river,  down 
to  a  little  east  of  Bee  River  and  come  down  the  old  channel? 

1316 — 22 — PT  3 5 


136  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  That  has  grown  up  with  trees  as  big  as  your  body,  all  the 
way  down.  It  would  be  a  big  expense  to  throw  it  back  into  the  old  channel, 
hut  where  it.  is  now  it  can  be  easily  maintained.  There  is  not  much  expense. 

Mr.  RAKER.  You  mean  where  it  is  now.  not  if  you  diverted  the  channel? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  That  is  the  straightest  and  most  direct  route,  as  I  can  show 
you  on  the  map  here,  right  into  the  Gulf.  Now,  if  you  throw  it  in  here,  in  the 
old  channel  [indicating],  you  have  got  to  go  right  over  that  reclamation  project. 

Mr.  RAKER.  When-  would  it  be  most  feasible  to  have  it? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Right  in  here  [indicating]. 

Mr.  RAKER.  That  being  the  case,  you  would  not  be  affected  by  virtue  of  the 
overflow;  that  would  be  avoided.  We  are  talking  now  about  the  physical  end 
of  it. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  It  would  be  absolutely  avoided,  because  there  would  not  be 
any  water  there ;  it  would  be  held  back  in  the  reservoirs. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Have  you  explained  to  the  committee  how  the  river  was  diverted 
from  Bee  River  into  the  tributaries  at  Pescadero? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  We  put  in  a  rock  dam  right  there  [indicating]. 

Mr.  RAKER.  And  did  you  make  a  cut? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  We  made  a  cut  there  that  cost  $250,000. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  was  the  nature  of  that  cut? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  We  built  three  channels,  300  feet  wide,  and  turned  the  river 
into  it  by  damming  the  Colorado  River,  driving  piles  and  putting  in  rocks  and 
making  a  diversion  here  [indicating]. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  How  did  you  ascertain  that  it  was  feasible  to  make  the  Pes- 
cadero cut? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  By  finding  the  grade  that  was  in  There. 

Mr.  HAYI>EN.  By  making  a  survey  of  the  country  it  was  found  that  there 
was  a  depression  through  which,  if  you  diverted  the  water  by  a  cut.  the  river 
would  run  instead  of  extending  over  and  against  the  present  levee? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  How  long  do  you  estimate  that  it  will  take  for  this  Pescadero 
section  of  the  delta  to  fill  up  with  mud,  just  as  Volcano  Lake  filled  up? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  I  have  asked  that  question  of  several  engineers  and  they 
tell  me  there  isn't  a  man  living  that  can  tell.  It  might  run  this  year;  it  might 
run  next  year;  it  might  fill  up  this  year.  There  is  no  one  that  can  give  us 
any  definite  statement  as  to  how  long  it  will  last. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  How  long  did  it  take  the  river  to  fill  Volcano  Lake? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  We  have  been  there  ever  since  the  break  in  1909. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  In  11  years  the  river  has  filled  up  Volcano  Lake  about  how 
much? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  About  8  or  10  feet. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Eight  or  ten  feel  of  silt  all  over  that  area,  so  that  now  the 
Volcano  Lake  section  of  the  country  has  filled  up  higher  than  the  Pescadero 
section  ? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Oh,  no ;  as  I  said  a  while  ago,  this  river  here  is  20  feet 
higher  than  that  levee — than  the  top  of  the  levee. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Was  there  a  ridge  between  the  Pescadero  drainage  area  and 
Volcano  Lake  which  you  cut  through,  so  that  the  water  could  run  into  the 
Pescadero  ? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  There  is  no  ridge  off  that  way.  but  there  is  a  ridge  where 
the  river  has  piled  up  and  spread  out.  Then  it  breaks  round  it.  But  you  don't 
want  to  get  it  into  your  head.  I  don't  think,  about  throwing  it  back  into  this 
old  channel,  Mr.  Raker,  because  this  is  the  most  direct  and  best  way. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  know;  but  you  said  this  would  affect  the  Arizona  side.  Now, 
there  is  the  old  channel  that  can  be  used  clear  down  to  the  Bee  River. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Well,  it  used  to  run  here,  you  know  [indicating]. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Yes:  it  is  marked  there. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Is  not  that  an  engineering  problem  that  this  committee 
can  not  solve? 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  do  not  think  so.  Now.  it  would  not  touch  the  Arizona  side  if 
the  water  ran  there  in  ordinary  stages  when  there  is  no  flood. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  If  you  took  the  water  out  there  [indicating]  it  would  not 
hurt  anybody,  because  there  would  not  be  much  going  through  there. 

Mr.  RAKER.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  floods  in  HIP  (lila  being  controlled  by  the 
San  Carlos  Dam,  as  stated,  and  in  the  Colorado  by  the  Boulder  Creek  Dam, 
as  stated,  the  ordinary  flow  of  the  water  that  would  then  remain  in  the 
Colorado  River  below  the  Yuma  Dam  could  be  easily  handled  and  would  in 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER    COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  137 

no  way  jeopardize  the  irrigation  of  hinds  below  in  cither  California  or  Lower 
California,  and  it  would  cost  but  little  to  handle  it. 

Mr.   NICKEKSON.  Absolutely.     Very  little. 

Mr.  SWING.  About  this  Hood  situation,  may  I  ask  that  you  state  what,  in 
your  opinion,  would  he  the  comparison  of  the  catastrophe  that  would  happen 
to  the  property  and  lives  of  American  citizens  if  the  river  should  break  at 
Volcano  Lake  levee  now,  as  compared  with  the  break  which  did  occur  in  1905. 
That  was  a  nationally  known  catastrophe. 

Mr.  NICKEHSO.N.  We  have  got  $100,000,000  worth  of  property  down  there  in 
the  valley,  and  there  must  be  $25,000,000  on  the  Mexican  side. 

Mr.  SWING.   Would  it  be  greater  or  less  than  that  of  1905? 

Mr.   NICKEKSOX.   It  would   be  greater,  because  there  is  more  property. 

Mr.  SWING.   Proportionately,  bow  much  greater  would  it  be? 

Mr.  NICKEKSON.  Thant  it  was  then? 

Mr.  SWING.  Yes. 

Mr.  NICKEKSON.  I  would  say  twice  as  great ;  probably  more. 

Mr.  SWING.  Then  there  were  5,000  people  in  Imperial  Valley;  now  there  are 
50,000 — 10  times  as  many  people  and  10  times  as  much  property. 

How  much  more  water  would  there  be  to  rush  in  on  the  valley  if  there  was 
a  break  now  than  there  was  then? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  The  natural  How  of  the  river  is  probably  150,000  or  200.000; 
then  you  have  all  of  this  backed  up  in  this  lake  [indicating]  20  miles  wide. 

Mr.  SWING.  In  1905  you  had  only  the  natural  flow  of  the  river? 

Mr.   XICKKHSON.   Yes. 

Mr.  RAKKK.  You  are  assuming  now  this  country  as  it  exists  at  the  present 
time,  being  subject  to  flood,  are  you  not? 

Mr.  NICKEKSON.  Y'es. 

Mr.  KAKEK.  But  if  the  Hoods  of  the  Colorado  and  the  Crila  were  controlled, 
this  question  that  you  have  now  confronting  you  relative  to  the  breaks  as  well 
as  to  the  cost  of  maintenance  and  upkeep,  would  be  obliterated. 

Mr.  NICKEKSON.  Absolutely.  It  woulud  be  a  very  small  matter;  would  not 
amount  to  anything  at  all. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So.  on  that  question  of  the  Alamo  Canal  and  the  levee,  and  this 
other  canal  running  from  Volcano  Lake  west  and  north,  that  could  be  used  at  a 
very  moderate  expense  in  upkeep  if  the  Hoods  were  controlled,  and  when  the 
flood  control  is  maintained  at  Boulder  Canyon  and  on  the  Gila,  the  question 
involved  relative  to  the  American  Canal  is  a  question  of  the  difficulty  between 
the  American  and  the  Mexican  canals. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  It  is  not  any  question  of  difficulty  between  them  at  all  :  it  is 
simply  taking  care  of  our  own  property  and  getting  out  of  a  revolutionary 
country.  And  everybody  would  receive  a  beneHt,  Judge;  the  Mexican  people 
would  receive  a  beneHt  on  account  of  the  floods  over  their  lands  being  con- 
trolled. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Now.  I  want  you  to  draw  a  distinction.  Do  not  let  the  facts 
as  they  exist  govern  your  answer.  If  the  floods  are  controlled  you  have  the 
dams,  the  ditches,  the  intakes,  and  you  would  not  be  bothered  with  these 
floods? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Absolutely  not. 

Mr.  RAKER.  The  silt  would  be  provided  for  by  the  dam;  therefore  you  could 
control  and  irrigate  not  only  the  lands  in  Mexico  but  the  lands  in  Colifornia 
with  an  ordinary  expenditure  for  maintenance  and  upkeep. 
Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  RAKER.  So  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  question  of  the  All-American  canal, 
so  far  as  this  land  is  concerned,  is  a  question  of  difference  between  the  citizens 
of  California  and  Lower  California  relative  to  the  payment  of  the  maintenance 
and  upkeep. 
Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes. 

Mr.  SWING.  That  is  part  of  it.  Now,  Mr.  Nickerson.  will  you  tell  the  com- 
mittee briefly  the  reason  why  we  must  get  out  of  Mexico  and  give  up  this  situa- 
tion and  get  a  new  intake,  resulting  from  the  trouble  between  the  c'tizens  of 
Arizona  and  the  citizens  of  California? 

Mr.  NTCKERSON.  I  am  well  acquainted  with  that.  We  have  to  build  a  weir. 
a  diversion  dam  in  here  [indicating]  to  get  the  water  into  our  intake  on  the 
Colorado  River,  and  the  Colorado  River  is  divided  between  California  and 
Arizona.  This  diversion  backs  the  water  up  and  it  is  a  menace  to  the  Arizona 
side.  There  isn't  any  question  about  that,  and  we  have  to  get  down  on  our 


138  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

knees  and  beg  them  every  year  in  order  to  get  a  weir  in  there.  It  is  just  a  year 
to  year  proposition,  and  they  are  after  us  all  the  time  saying,  "  Why  don't 
you  do  something?"  Then  we  have  an  injunction  hanging  over  our  heads  now 
to  stop  us,  and  it  may  throw  us  into  court  most  any  time,  and  it'  we  should  have 
to  go  into  court  and  be  held  up  there  for  any  length  of  time  it  would  mean  ruin 
for  the  Imperial  Valley,  absolutely. 

Now  we  have  been  saying  to  them,  and  we  have  a  contract  with  the  Govern- 
ment to  move  our  heading  up  to  Laguna  Dam  in  that  diversion — 

Mr.  RAKEB  (interposing).  Before  you  pass  that  let  us  get  the  facts  so  that 
we  may  know  how  we  are  acting — and  the  facts  are  what  you  want  to  give 
us — suppose  you  put  your  weir  in  at  your  intake  now  on  the  Colorado  River: 
when  there  is  an  ordinary  flow  in  the  river,  which  means  simply  enough  to 
irrigate  the  land  below,  would  or  would  there  not  be  any  question  of  a  hood. 
so  far  as  the  Arizona  side  was  concerned? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Not  with  an  ordinary  river,  but  when  the  flood  comes — 

Mr.  RAKEB  (interposing).  I  want  to  eliminate  the  flood. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Well.  yes. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Just  a  moment  now — I  want  to  get  the  facts:  I  want  to  get 
something  upon  which  to  act,  and  I  am  asking  you  if.  assuming  now  that  the 
floods  are  controlled  by  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  and  the  dam  in  the  Gila 
River;  then  there  will  be  an  ordinary  flow  at  your  intake,  and  that  being  the 
case,  assuming  that  to  be  the  fact,  the  silt  being  held  back  by  the  dam.  would 
there  be  danger  of  flooding  the  Arizona  side  with  the  river  in  the  condition  thus 
stated  ? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  I  do  not  think  so.  But  then  we  have  got  to  get  out  of 
Mexico ;  we  can't  get  out  of  Mexico  with  it  now.  We  have  got  to  go  up  the 
river  20  miles  in  order  to  get  out  with  diversion  so  as  to  get  on  higher  ground. 

Mr.  SWING.  There  will  be  no  danger  of  floods  in  Arizona  after  th:s  Boulder 
Canyon  Dam  is  built,  unless  we  have  to  put  this  weir  hack  in  the  river. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  If  we  raise  the  elevation  of  the  water,  then  seepage  comes  in 
to  bother  them.  If  we  raise  the  elevation  they  are  subject  to  seepage. 

Mr.  SWING.  Have  you  the  agreement  there  which  they  wanted  you  to  sign? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  SWING.  That  presents  the  view  of  Arizona  clearly. 

Mr.  NICKERSOX.  I  will  not  have  time  to  read  hardly  any  of  it,  but  we  have 
to  put  up  a  bond  to  protect  them. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Put  it  in  the  record. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  All  right.  We  mave  to  put  up  a  bond  of  $500.000  to  protect 
the  Yuma  Water  Users'  Association.  I  have  a  copy  of  the  contract  that  they 
want  us  to  sign  this  year,  and  then  we  have  to  sign  a  death  warrant  besides 
to  get  that. 

Mr.  RAKER.  Let  that  go  into  the  record,  will  you? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Yes.  Then  I  have  also  a  statement  showing  comparison 
of  costs  of  operation  in  Mexico. 

Mr.  RAKEK.  Now.  assuming  that  the  Boulder  Canyon  dam  is  in.  with  its 
control  of  water  for  two  or  three  years  on  the  Colorado :  with  the  Gila  con- 
trolled by  the  San  Carlos  dam ;  with  the  floods  controlled  and  only  enough 
•water  coming  down  to  irrigate  the  lands  that  need  irrigation,  would  there  be  a 
raise  in  the  water  at  the  weir  above  the  ordinary  level  so  as  to  in  any  way 
affect  either  the  California  or  Arizona  lands  that  are  now  being  irrigated? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  On  the  California  side  it  would  not,  but  it  would  in  Arizona, 
yes,  because  they  are  farming  right  up  near  this  weir:  on  our  side  it  is  rocky 
and  hills,  so  we  do  not  irrigate  anything  there.  But  that  would  not  do  us  any 
good  to  get  down  into  Mexico. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I  want  to  leave  out  any  question  about  Mexico  and  confine  the 
question  to  the  facts,  because  after  that  I  am  going  to  put  another  question, 
hut  I  am  just  gett'ng  the  physical  facts  now. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  Have  I  answered  that  question? 

Mr.  RAKER.  Yes,  you  have  answered  that  pretty  well  now. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  want  to  ask  unanimous  consent  of  the  committee  to  put  into 
the  record  this  agreement  prepared  by  the  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Associa- 
tion, which  they  have  asked  the  Imperial  Valley  irrigation  district  to  sign  as 
a  condition  for  diverting  water  this  year  from  the  river. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho  (presiding  i.  Without  objection  it  may  go  into  the 
record. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLOEADO   RIVER   BASIN. 


139 


(The  papers  referred  to  follow:) 
Statement  xjioi 


ro>i>]i<iri*on  of  coxfx  of  operation   in  Me.rico. 
period  Man  1.  191(1,  to  Mail  1. 


;/r'//.s-  from 


[Costs,   Hanlon   heading  and   valley   division   in    Mexico  ;   amounts  shown   are   to   nearest 

dollar.] 


1916 

(May  to 
Decem- 
ber). 

1917 
(entire 
calendar 
year). 

1918 
(entire 
calendar 
year). 

1919 
(entire 
calendar 
year). 

1920 
(entire 
calendar 
year). 

1921 
(entire 
calendar 
year). 

To  Mav  1, 
1922. 

Orand 
totals. 

Operating  expense*.  . 
Protective  work.. 

$389,  779 
219,281 

$730,2*4 
170,655 

1785,662 

395,488 

$943,  592 
545,  958 

$861,190 
633,020 

$503,309 
469,640 

$18(1,731 
123,387 

$4,401,537 
2,  557,  429 

Additions  and  better- 
ments. 

272,  OSO 

517,  544 

822,  213 

611,714 

333,140 

633 

3,210 

2,  560,  534 

Equipment         pur- 
chased .  .  . 

3,995 

186,882 

382,  571 

05,  349 

287,  024 

4,343 

2,308 

932,  472 

Interest  and  discount 
on  district  bonds... 
Miscellaneous    inter- 
est, etc 

139,  5G3 
8,930 

350,  2(54 
26,029 

523,527 
19,648 

349,310 
20,874 

336,638 
60,449 

434,411 
15,960 

194,  232 

2,333,951 
151,890 

Totals  

1,033,628 

1.9*7,6JS 

2,  930,  099 

2,  536,  803 

2,511,401 

1,428,296 

509,868 

12,937,813 

•Drlagline  equipment  purchased  1921  was  charged  to  protective  work  and  readjusted  1922,  $126,592.06. 

Statement  xlioiritnj  comparison  of  costs  of  operations  in  3fr.ri.cft,  May  1,  1916.  to 

Man  ./.  l'.>2.>. 

Operation  : 

Water   distribution $960,  000.  00 

I>redsring,  cleaning  canals,  etc. — 

Mexico 1,070,240.00 

Intake  Andrade 1.  502,  000.  00 

•    Miscellaneous,  maintenance  of  levees,  canals,  and  structures.  1.319.297.00 


Total 4.  401,  537.  00 


Additions  and  betterment*. 


Structures  : 

Ilockwood   <Jt 

si'61.120.  15 

Oil  and  water  tanks_ 

6,0&1.49 

I>rit't  boom 

8,  060.  46 

Power.       and       tele- 

phones 

51.  70 

We<t        side       main 

heading     _ 

12.  S07.  85 

headgate  tecolote  

5,  270.  40 

Tort  u  oso  drop 

11.037.15 

Tortuoso     wasteway 

and    trestle 

27,  407.  31 

Alamo    waste 

86,  464.  81) 

By-pass  gate  sharps- 

12,917.51 

Wanllaw   check  

:!•_'.  928.  66 

Wistaria    check 

29.  915.  2s 

K;isj    side  headgate_ 

55.  965.  95 

Cudahv  check 

74.:::. 

Bulkhead.       Cudahv 

check 

20,  325.  09 

Wistaria    wasteway- 

46,  117.30 

Kncina   chute 

13,567.40 

l-'.ridges     across     va- 

ricii-    canals 

14,  972.  20 

Sharpes    heading  

134,  096.  69 

Miscellaneous 

172.  907.  14 

1.  076,  763.  13 

Canal  system : 

Rockwood  intake    __  152.221.79 

( Vrro  Prieto  Canal  _  266.  r.2'.».  59 

Solfatara 147.  857.  99 

Tecolote  cut 215,  869.  88 

Alamo    Canal     (cut- 
offs)    158,  948.  72 

Dermara  cut 16,  547.  70 

Alamo   Canal    train- 
ing  •_ 158, 125.  82 

Widening  Cerro  Pri- 
eto   108,  780. 14 

Alamo  Mocho  cut—  35,  295.  33 

Carrillo  cut 88,  2(53.  41 

Alamo    Canal    levee 

K.  S.  heading 6,  976.  41 


1,355,416.78 


Buildings  : 

Town  site  and  build- 
ings  

Employees'  build- 
ings, Andrade.  and 
offices;  also  ware- 
houses   

Hydrographers'  and 
watchmen's  houses 


20,  (50:2.34 

63, 938.  90 

16,240.95 

100.  782. 19 


140  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    BASIN. 

Equipment,  liny  1.  1916.  1>i  Mai/  1.   ?.'»..'>. 


Roadway  and  tracks : 

Air     compressor     and 

equipment $10.  585.  73 

Locomotives,  cars,  dredges, 


etc. : 


Locomotives 36,  342.  40 

Dump  cars 128,  717. 14 

Spreader 11,094.81 

Monighan  dredges 40,  972.  86 


Locomotives,  etc. — Cout'd. 

Marion  dredges *12.  noo.  no 

Suction  dredges 360,  300.  48 

Cranes 37.  358.  "-I' 

Miscellaneous 17.  607.  76 


654.  980.  00 
Quarry,  Andrade 27.  571.  90 


IMPERIAL  II;JU<;ATIO.N  DISTRICT.  June  1~>.  l!i.l.>. 

Mr.  NICKKKSON.  The  attached  agreement  for  1022  with  the  Yuma  Connty 
'Vater  Users'  Association  was  received  after  I  had  written  my  letter.  Look 
it  over,  the  board  has  not  taken  any  action  on  it  yet. 

F.  H.  MtlvER. 
AGREEMENT. 

1.  This  indenture,  made  this  6th  day  of  June.  1922.  between  Imperial   Irri- 
gation District,  a  municipal  corporation  duly  organized  and  existing  under  the 
laws  of  the  State  of  California,  and  doing  business  in  Imperial  County.  State 
of  California,  hereinafter  called  and  referred    to    as    the    district,  and  Yuma 
County  Water  Users'  Association,  a  corporation  duly  organized  and  existing 
under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  Arizona,  and  doing  business  at  Yuma,  Stare  of 
Arizona,  acting  for  and  on  behalf  of  its.  and  all  of  its,  Constituent  members 
and  shareholders;  hereinafter  called  and  referred  to  as  the  association:   \vit- 
nesseth. 

2.  Whereas  the  district  is  engaged  in  the  business  of  appropriating  and  di- 
verting irrigation  waters  from  the  flow  of  the  Colorado  River  at  a  point  in 
said  liver  known  as  Hanlon's  heading,  at.  or  near,  fractional  sections  tliirtv- 
five  and  thirty-six  (35  and  36).  township  sixteen  (16)  south,  range  twenty-one 
(21)   east,  San  Bernardino  meridian,  in  Yuma  County.  State  of  Arizona,  for 
the  irrigation  and  reclamation  of  many  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  in  Im- 
perial Valley,  Imperial  County.  State  of  California,  known  as  Imperial  Valley 
irrigation  project ;  and 

3.  Whereas,  in  order  to  secure  a  sufficient  flow  of  irrigation  water  to  prop- 
erly irrigate  and  reclaim  said  lands,  and  to  prevent  the  same  from  returning 
to  their  original  desert  condition,  it  is  now  necessary  to  erect,  and  temporarily 
maintain,  during  low-water  periods  in  said  river,  a  dam,  or  weir,  in  said  river. 
at  or  near  said  Hanlon's  heading :  and 

4.  Whereas  the  installation   and  maintenance  of  said  dam  tends  to  create 
such  a  condition  in  the  flow  of  the  waters  of  said  Colorado  River  as  to  endan- 
ger the  works  of  the  Yuma  project  of  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service, 
and  the  lands  and  property  of  the  association,  and  its  constituent   members 
and  shareholders ;  and 

5.  Whereas  the  association  has  granted  its  permission  that  ;i  weir,  or  dam. 
may  be  constructed  and  maintained  at  said  point  in  said  river  from  July  1. 
1922.  until  July  1,  1923,  subject  to  certain  conditions,  provisos,  and  exceptions 
hereinafter  more  fully  set  forth;  and  has  stipulated  and  agreed  that  a  certain 
temporary  restraining  order  heretofore  issued  out  of  the  Superior  Court  of  the 
State  of  Arizona,  in  case  No.  2429.  and  now  in  force  and  effect  in  said  court, 
wherein  the  said  association  and  others  are  plaintiffs,  and  the  said  district  and 
others  are  defendants,  restraining  and  enjoining  the  district  herein  from  erect- 
ing and  maintaining  any  weir,  or  dam,  at  said  point,  shall  be  so  modified  as  to 
permit  the  erection  and  maintenance  of  a  weir,  or  dam.  therein  during  said 
last-mentioned  period:  and  not  to  further  prosecute  said  suit  during  such  period. 

6.  Now,  therefore,  the  said  district  in  consideration  of  the  foregoing,  does 
hereby  promise,  undertake,  and  agree  that,  if  it  becomes  necessary  for  the  ac- 
complishment of  said  purpose  to  erect  and   temporarily  maintain   a  dam.   or 
weir,  in  and  across  the  Colorado  River,  at  or  near  said  Hanlon's  heading,  as. 
hereinbefore  described,  that  it  shall  construct  the  same  out  of  brush,  without 
the  use  of  any  rock  whatsoever,  and  that  said  brush  shall  be  erected  and  main- 
tained on  the  top  of  the  crest  of  the  rock  dam  and  weir  heretofore  erected  by 
the  district  so  as  to  hold  the  water  at  no  greater  height  than  is  necessary  for 
the  diversion  of  the  amount  of  water  actually  required  for  the  irrigation  of  the 
lands  of  said  district  and  that  said  brush  wier.  or  dam,  and  the  materials  com- 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  141 

posing  the  same,  shall  be  held  and  maintained  in  place  by  a  system  of  piling 
driven  through,  and  erected  upon  the  crest  of  said  rock  dam  or  as  near  thereto 
as  practicable ;  if  necessary  said  system  of  piling  to  be  used  in  conjunction 
with  certain  guy  ropes  and  ties  made  fast  to  certain  dolphin  anchors  erected  in 
said  river  immediately  above  said  rock  dam.  the  height  to  which  the  dam  is 
to  be  maintained  and  the  extent  of  said  system  of  piling  to  be  subject  to  control 
by  the  project  manager  of  the  Yuma  project:  and  the  district  further  prom- 
ises, agrees,  and  undertakes  to  remove  ;ill  of  said  brush  dam.  or  weir,  from  out 
of  said  river  on,  or  prior  to.  July  1,  1923,  and  at  any  other  time  between  said 
July  1,  1922,  and  July  1.  1923,  that  Porter  J.  Preston,  project  manager  of  the 
Yuma  project  of  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service,  or  William  Wisener, 
president  of  the  association,  or  Maj.  E.  D.  Ardery,  district  engineer  United 
States  Army,  or  their  successors  in  office,  shall  deem  the  maintenance  of  said 
dam  to,  in  any  way,  endanger  any  of  the  works  of  said  Y"uma  project,  or  any 
of  the  lands  or  property  of  the  association,  or  its  shareholders  and  constituent 
members,  or  any  land  within  said  Yuma  project  on  either  side  of  said  Colorado 
River ;  and  the  district  hereby  undertakes  and  agrees  to  keep  and  maintain  at, 
or  near,  said  dam  a  sufficient  amount  of  explosives  to  immediately  blow  out  and 
remove  said  dam  to  such  an  extent  as  will  permit  the  free  flow  of  the  Colorado 
River  to  the  southward,  so  that  the  same  will  not  endanger  any  of  said  property. 

7.  And   the  said   district   further  stipulates   and   agrees,   that    the   permission 
so  given  to  erect  and  temporarily  ma  ntain  such  a  dam.  or  weir,  in  the  Colorado 
Riyer  at  said  point,  and  the  permission  heretofore  given   frr  the  erection  and 
maintenance  of  dams  and  weirs  across  the  Colorado  R'ver.  at.  or  near,  said 
point,  and  their  erection  and  maintenance,  and  the  giving,  in  the  future,  of 
permission  to  erect  and  maintain  such  dams  and  weirs,  shall  net  be  taken,  held 
or  deemed,  nor  shall  either  of  them  IK-  taken,  held  or  deemed,  not  to  be  of 
irreparable   injury   to   the   association,   its   shareholders   and    constituent   mem- 
bers:  and   the  granting  of  said  permission,  and  the  erection  and  maintenance 
of  said  dams  or  weirs,  shall  he  without  prejudice  to  the  right  of  the  associa- 
tion,  its  shareholders   and   constituent  members,   to  have  entered   in   sa:d   su't 
No.  242!).  or  any  other  proceeding,  in  any  ether  court  of  competent  jurisdiction, 
upon  due  and  sufficient  evidence,  a  decree  permanently  restraining  the  district 
from  constructing  and  maintaining  such  weir,  or  weirs,  or  any  weir.   dam.  or 
dams,  across  said  river. 

8.  And  the  district,  in  consideration  of  the  premises  as  hereinbefore  set  frrth, 
docs   hereby   further  promise,   agree  and  undertake  to   pay  to  the  association, 
its   shareholders    and    constituent    members    all    damages    that    may    result    to 
them,  or  to  either,  or  any  of  them,   from  injury  to   their  person   or  property 
because  of  the  erection    or   maintenance   of  said   brush   dam.   or   weir,   or   the 
ma  ntenance  of  the  rock  base   upon   which   the   same   shall   be   constructed   as 
hereinbefore    described,    and    the    district    further    promises,    undertakes,    and 
agrees   to  pay   the  ass*  ( iation   its  shareholders  and   constituent   members,   any 
and  all  damages  that  may  result  to  them,  or  either  of  them  or  any  of  them, 
because  of   the  erection   or   maintenance  of  the   n-maining   portions  of  all.   or 
any.  of  the  nek  dams  or  weirs  heretofore  placed  in  said  Colorado  River  at.  or 
near.  sa>'d  point,  including  what  is  known  as  the  Clark  Dam  or  weir. 

9.  And  it  is  further  stipulated   and   agreed   that   the  association,  or  either 
or  any  of  its  constituent   members  or  shareholders,  may  sue  hereunder  in  their 
own   right,   and   without  joining  any   <  ther  party   hereto  as  a   party  plaintiff; 
rrori'li'tl.  l/dir<T<  r.  That   if  more  than  one  of  the  said  shareholders  cr  constit- 
uent  members    should    separately    sue    the    district    for    such    damage,    all    of 
said   actions  sc   brought    in   the   same   court   may   be  consolidated   and    tried    as 
one   action,   each   plaintiff   recovering   the   amount   of   damage   that    he   or   she 
shall  have  suffered,  as  finally  determined  by  such  court. 

10.  The  district,  for  and  in  consideration  of  said  premises,  further  promises, 
•covenants,  and  agrees  to  entirely   remove  from  out   of  the  bed  cf  (he  Colorado 
River,  on  or  before  December  :>0.  1923.  all.  and  all  parts  of  any,  and  all  dams 
and  weirs,   piles  and  piling,   rock  and  brush   anchors,   guys.   ties,  and  all   <<ther 
material  whatsoever  placed,  or  caused  to  lie  placed,  there'n  by  the  district  or 
its  predecessors  iii  the  ownership  and  <  peration  of  said  Imperial  Valley  irriga- 
tion projects,  at   any  time  whatsoever  for  the  purpose  of  impeding  the  How  of 
said  river,  and  raising  the  height  of  the  waters  thereof  so  that  the  same  would 
more  freely  flow  into  the  irrigation   canals  of  the  district.  <  r  any  of  its  pred- 
ecessors, and  to  the  extent  that   all  of  the  waters    >f  the  Colorado  River  shall 
flow  as  freely  to  the  southward  as  said   waters  did  flow  prior   to   the   placing 
of  any  obstructions  in  the  !>o<]  therecf  by  the  district,  or  any  of  its  said  pred- 
ecessors. 


142  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

11.  It  is  understood  and  agreed  that  the  district  shall  furnish  a  satisfactory 
surety   bond   in   the   sum   of   live  hundred   thousand   dollars    <  s.loo.<KX>  >    to   the 
United   States  of  America   anil   the   association,   as   joint  and   several   obligees, 
to  reimburse  them  for  any  damage  resulting  from  the  erection  or  maintenance 
or  said  dam  or  weir,  and  conditioned  for  the  removal  of  all  of  said  obstruc- 
tions from  said  river.     It  is  expressly  understood  and  agreed  that  in  the  event 
of  a  failure  of  the  district  to  fully  comply  with  the  conditions  of  paragraph 
ten    (10)    that   the  bond  of  $500.000  shall  be  forfeited   as   liquidated   damages 
and  shall  not  be  considered  a  penalty,  but  the  proceeds  thereof  shall  be  used 
by  the  association  for  the  removal  of  the  rock,  brush,  and  other  obstructions 
left  in  the  river  bed;   and   that  a   recovery,  or  recoveries,   on   said  bond   shall 
not  be  a  bar  to  any  action,  or  actions,  by  the  association,  or  its  constituent 
members,  or  any  of  them,  in-  the  event  that  they,  or  either  of  them,  should 
be  damaged  greater  because  of  the  district's  breach  of  any  of  the  terms  or 
covenants  of  this  agreement:   it  being  understood  and  agreed  that  the  district 
undertakes,  promises,  and  agrees  to  pay  all  the  damage  that  may  result  because 
of  its  breach  of  any,  or  all,  of  the  terms,  conditions,  and  covenants  of  this  agree- 
ment,  notwithstanding  the  execution    and   delivery   of  any   bond,   or   bonds,  or 
any  recovery   thereon.     And  in  the  event  of  damage  accruing,   and   said  bond 
becoming  exhausted  in  whole  or  in  part,  during  the  life  of  this  agreement,  the 
district  agrees  to  furnish  additional  security  and  assurance  so  that  there  will 
always  be  during  the  life  of  this  agreement  security  against  damage  to  the 
association  in  the  sum  of  $500,0oo. 

12.  In  consideration   of  the   foregoing  premises   the   district  hereby   agrees 
to  hold  the  association  harmless  in  the  event  it  may  be  required  or  compelled 
to  pay  the  rent  payable  on  April  1.  1923.  and  April'].  1024.  and  April  1.  lirjfi, 
reserved  in  that  certain  lease  for  the  term  of  three  years  entered  into  under 
date  of  April  1,  1J)22.  between  Agnes  ('.  Heineman  and  husband,  and  the  as- 
sociation for  certain  lands  lying  west  of  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service 
levee  in  section   36.  T.   16  S.,  R.  21   E.,   San   Bernardino  meridian,   in    Yuraa 
County,  Ariz.,  and  the  district  further  agrees  to  hold  the  association  free  and 
harmless  from  all  costs,  expense,   liability,  and  damage   accruing  or  resulting 
to  the  association  because  of  any   lease,  license,  or  permit  given  or  granted, 
expressly  or  impliedly.  by  this  instrument,  or  by  assignment  of.  or  subletting 
under,    said    lease,    or    otherwise,    by    the    association    to    the    district    for    the 
en  ction  or  maintenance  of  said  temporary   dam  or  weir,  or  for  the  erection 
or  maintenance  of  any  structure  or  structures  on  said   land  for  the  erection 
or  maintenance  of  said  dam  or  weir. 

18.  The  district  further  agrees,  as  a  condition  subsequent,  to  promptly,  ami 
with  diligence  and  in  good  faith,  take  such  necessary  steps  as  shall  be  re- 
quired under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  California  to  procure  funds  sufficient 
for  the  procuring  and  construction  of  another  heading,  and  diversion  struc- 
tures with  a  sufficient  aqueduct,  on  the  Colorado  River,  at  Laguna  I»am.  in 
accordance  with  the  terms  of  the  contract  between  the  district  and  the  Sec- 
retary of  the  Interior  dated  October  i_':$.  1918.  In  the  event  of  the  district 
failing  to  comply  with  the  terms  of  this  condition  subsequent,  the  association 
may.  at  its  option,  declare  this  agreement  null  and  void  and  revoke  all  license 
an  !  permits  granted  hereunder.  And  in  the  event  of  the  procuring  said 
funds  the  said  district  further  covenants  and  agrees,  within  three  months 
after  the  procuring  of  said  funds,  to  begin  in  good  faith  (strikes,  injunctions, 
and  acts  of  God  cxcepted.)  the  construction  of  the  necessary  works  for  the 
procuring  of  said  other  heading  and  diversion  point  for  taking  its  irrigating 
water  from  the  Colorado  River,  as  set  forth  in  this  paragraph,  and  to  dili- 
gently prosecute  such  construction  to  completion:  otherwise,  to  pay  to  the  asso- 
ciation as  a  penalty  the  sum  of  five  hundred  dollars  (8500)  per  day  for  each 
day  that  there  shall  be  default  by  the  district  in  complying  with  the  terms 
and  conditions  set  forth  in  this  paragraph:  1'roriilrd.  linirrrrr.  That  nothing 
in  this  paragraph  contained  shall  be  deemed,  taken,  or  held  as  being  obliga- 
tory upon  the  association  to  accept  said  penalty,  but  that  upon  such  default 
the  association  may  revoke  all  permission,  license,  and  leave  granted  by  this 
contract  as  a  whole;  but  in  no  event  shall  anything  in  this  paragraph  con- 
tained be  deemed,  taken,  or  held  to  be  any  waiver  of  the  right  of  the  associa- 
tion, or  any  of  its  constituent  members  or  shareholders,  to  sue  for  and  recover 
any  damage  accruing  to  it,  or  them,  or  either  of  them,  because  of  the  breach 
of  any  of  the  terms  of  this  contract;  and  nothing  in  this  paragraph  contained 
shall  be  deemed,  taken,  or  held  to  relieve  the  district  from  liability  because 
of  the  breach  of  the  covenants  of  this  contract:  Provided  furtJxr.  Innrcrer, 
That  nothing  herein  contained  shall  be  deemed,  taken,  or  held  by  any  court, 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLOEADO   RIVER  BAS1X.  143 

tribunal,  board,  bureau,  person,  or  corporation,  whether  a  party  to  this  con- 
tract or  not,  as  a  waiver  by  the  association  of  its  right  to  sue  for  an  1  recover, 
either  ar  law  or  in  equity,  or  by  other  means,  the  sum  of  $1.600.000  agreed 
to  be  paid  by  the  district  to  the  United  States  for  the  use  of  said  Laguna 
I»am.  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  contract  between  the  said  district  and 
the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  under  date  of  October  23,  1918,  but  the  associa- 
tion disclaims  any  right  to  recover  said  sum  from  said  district. 

14.  It  is  agreed  that  during  the  erection  and  maintenance  of  said  dam.  or 
weir,  the  association  may  employ  and  retain  an  inspector,  or  inspectors,  on 
said   work  to   ascertain   and   determine  if  such   erection   and   maintenance   is 
being  operated  and  maintained  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  this  agree- 
ment, and  said  district  agrees  to  reimburse  the  association  for  such  reasonable 
compensation  as  may  be  paid  by  it  to  such  inspectors,  not  to  exceed  $24  per 
diem.     And  the  said  project  manager,  or  his  successors  in  office,  in  person  or 
by  subordinates,  may  at  any  time-  during  the  life  of  this  agreement  enter  upon 
said  works  or  any  portion  thereof  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  if  the  same, 
or  any  portion  thereof,  are  being  constructed  and  maintained  in  accordance  with 
the  terms  and  conditions  of  this  agreement,  and  in  the  event  of  their  being 
constructed  or  maintained  in  violation  of  said  terms  or  conditions,  to  assume 
control  and  direction  of  such  works  and  their  construction  and  maintenance, 
and  to  operate  the  same,  in  whole  or  in  part,  as  by  this  agreement  prescribed  ; 
provided  always  that  such  control,  direction,  or  operation  shall  not  result  in 
denying  to  the  district  a  sufficient  supply  of  irrigation  water  for  the  needs  of 
said*  Imperial  Valley  irrigation  project,  except  in  the  emergency  contemplated 
and  provided  for  in  paragraph  6  hereof. 

15.  It  is  further  understood  and  agreed  that  should  the  maintenance  of  the 
dam  be  deemed  a  menace  to  the  city  of  Yutna  or  any  of  the  lands  of  the  Yuma 
Valley  or  endanger  the  same  by  seepage  or  flood  and  its  removal  be  ordered  by 
Project  Manager  Porter  J.  Preston.  Maj.  E.  D.  Ardery,  district  engineer,  United 
States  Army,  or  William  Wisener.  president  of  the  association,  or  their  suc- 
cessor or  successors  in  office,  the  district  agrees  to  immediately  proceed  with 
the  removal  of  said  dam,  and  should  the  district  refuse  to  do  so.  or  neglect  to 
act  promptly,  it  is  further  agreed  that  Project  Manager  Porter  .1.  Preston,  or 
his  successor  in  office,  in  person  or  by  a  representative  or  representatives  ap- 
pointed by  the  board  of  governors,  may,  at  the  demand  or  request  of  the  board 
of  governors  of  the  association,  enter  upon  any  portion  of  the  works  of  said 
district  on  either  the  Arizona  or  California  side  of  the  river  and  take  possession 
of  the  same  and  proceed  to  assume  control  and  direction  of  the  work  of  removal 
of  said  diversion  dam.     The  district  hereby  unreservedly  agrees  to  waive,  re- 
linquish, and  cancel  any  and  all  rights  to  prevent  such  action  by  injunction 
or  any  other  process  of  law   that  might   be  invoked   in  the  courts  of  either 
Arizona  or  California  or  the  Federal  court. 

1<>.  It  is  understood  and  agreed  that  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  district  is  a 
municipal  corporation  of  the  State  of  California  it  may  be  necessary  or  appro- 
priate, in  the  event  of  the  breach  of  any  of  the  terms  or  covenants  of  this  agree- 
ment. for  the  association  to  sue  hereunder.  or  under  said  reimbursement  bond, 
in  the  State  of  California,  and  that  such  proceedings,  if  had.  will  result  in  addi- 
tional cost  and  expense  to  the  association:  wherefore  the  district,  in  cons'dera- 
tion  thereof  and  said  premises,  hereby  promises  and  agrees  to  pay  to  the 
association,  in  the  event  of  action  being  brought  hereunder,  or  under  said 
reimbursement  bond  in  the  State  of  California,  the  sum  of  one  thousand 
dollars  (Sl.oooi  to  reimburse  the  association  for  the  additional  cost  and  ex- 
pense to  it  of  suing  in  the  State  of  California,  and  such  additional  sum  for 
attorney's  1'ees  as  may  be  deemed  reasonable  by  the  court  trying  such  action. 

In  witness  whereof  the  said  corporations  have,  by  order  of  their  respective 
governing  bodies,  caused  these  presents  to  be  executed  in  their  respective  cor- 
porate names,  by  their  presidents  and  secretaries,  and  aitesied  by  their  seals, 
the  day  .-md  year  first  above  written,  in  duplicate. 

IHHICATION  I  MSTKKT. 


President, 

Attest  :  •    --  . 

Seensterp. 

YT.MA   CorMY    WAIKI:    CSKKS'    ASSOCIATION-. 
By  -  —  , 

President. 

Attest  :  --  . 


144  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX. 

EL  CENTRO.  CALIF..  .funr  ]>.   1!>?2. 
Mr.  J.  S.  XICKERSON, 

Congress  Hall,  W<i*1>  in  I/ton.  1).  C. 

DEAR  SIR:  In  compliance  with  your  request  by  wire,  under  date  of  June  0. 
you  will  find  inclosed  contract  entered  into  with  the  Yunia  County  Water 
Users'  Association  for  the  year  1920,  copy  of  the  permit  issued  hy  the  War 
Department,  and  a  copy  of  the  bond  of  *.~>oo.oi  i<  i  to  the  Yunia  association,  and 
also  documents  concerning  the  present  status  of  the  injunction. 

In  my  wire  I  requested  that  yon  advise  me  if  it  was  necessary  to  furnish  yi-u 
with  copies  of  these  documents  for  former  years. 
Yours  very  truly. 

F.   H.  MclVER. 
Secrct'tri/  Imperial  Irrigation  District. 


Whereas  by  section  10  of  an  act  of  Congress  approved  March  3,  1899,  en- 
titled "An  act  making  appropriations  for  the  construction,  repair,  and  preser- 
vation of  certain  public  works  en  rivers  and  harbors,  and  for  other  purposes." 
it  is  provided  that  it  shall  not  be  lawful  to  build  or  commence  the  building  of 
any  wharf.  p!er.  dolphin,  boom.  weir,  breakwater,  bulkhead,  jetty,  or  other 
structure  in  any  port.  r<  adstoad.  haven,  harbor,  canal,  navigable  river,  or 
other  water  of  the  United  States,  outside  established  harbor  lines,  or  where 
no  harbor  lines  have  been  established,  except  on  [dans  recommended  by  the 
Chief  cf  Engineers  and  authorized  ^y  the  Secretary  of  War;  and  it  shall  not 
be  lawful  to  excavate  or  till,  or  in  any  manner  to  alter  or  modify  the  course, 
location,  condition,  or  capacity  of  any  port,  roadstead.  Inn-en,  harbor,  canal, 
lake,  harbor  or  refuge,  or  inclosure  within  the  limits  of  any  breakwater,  or  of 
the  channel  of  any  navigable  water  of  the  United  States,  unless  the  work  has 
been  recommended  by  the  Chief  of  Engineers  and  authorized  by  the  Secretary 
of  War  prior  to  beginning  the  same ; 

And  whereas  application  has  been  made  to  the  Secretary  of  War  by  the  Im- 
perial irrigation  district  of  California  for  authority  to  repair  and  rebuild  its 
tempcrary  diversion  dam  or  weir  (originally  constructed  constncted  under 
authority  of  War  Department  permit  dated  February  1-1,  1917).  located  in 
the  Colorado  River  at  or  near  Hanlons  Heading,  at  the  site  shown  on  the  map 
hereto  attached,  and  to  maintain  said  structure  until  July  1.  1921,  as  recom- 
mended by  the  Chief  of  Engineers : 

Now.  therefore,  this  is  to  certify  that  the  Secretary  of  War  hereby  authorizes 
the  said  work  of  repairing  and  rebuilding  the  Imperial  irrigation  district's 
temporary  diversion  dam  or  weir  in  the  Colorado  Ilivnr  at  or  near  Hanlons 
Heading  and  maintaining  the  same  until  July  1.  1921.  upon  the  following 
conditions : 

1.  That  it  is  to  be  understood  that  this  authority  does  not  give  any  prop- 
erty rights  either  in  real  estate  or  material,  or  any  exclusive  privileges;  and 
that  it  does  not  authorize  any  injury  to  private  property  or  invasYn  of  private 
rights,  or  any  infringement  of  Federal.  State,  or  local  laws  or  regulations,  nor 
does  it  obviate  the  necessity  of  obtaining  State  assent  to  the  work  authorized. 
It  merely  expresses  the  assent  of  the  Federal  Government  s<    far  as  concerns 
the  public  rights  of  navigation.      (See  Cummings  v.  Ch'cago,  188  U.  S.  41  o.  r 

2.  That   the   work  shall  be  subject   to   the  supervision   and   approval   of  the 
district  engineer.  Engineer  Department  at  Large,  in  charge  of  the  locality,  who 
may  temporarily  suspend  the  work  at  any  time  if.  in  his  judgment,  the  interests 
of  navigation  so  require. 

3.  That  if  any  pipe,  wire,  or  cable  is  herein  authorized,  it  shall  be  placed  and 
maintained  with  a  clearance  not  less  than  that  shown  by  the  profile  on  the 
plan  attached  hereto. 

4.  That  so  fa i1  as  any  material   is  dredged  in  the  prosecution  of  the  work 
herein  authorized  it  shall  be  removed  evenly,  and  no  large  refuse  piles  shall  be 
left.     It  shall  be  deposited  tc  the  satisfaction  of  the  said  district  engineer  and 
in  accordance  with  his-  prior  permission  or  instructions,  either  on  shore  above 
high  water  or  at  such  dumping  ground  as  may  be  designated  by  him.  and  where 
he  may  so  require,  within  or  behind  a  good  and  substantial  bulkhead  or  bulk- 
heads, such  as  will  prevent  escape  of  the  material  into  the  waterway  ;  and  so 
far  as  the  pipe,  wire,  or  cable  is  laid  in  a  trench,  the  formation  of  permanent 
ridges  across  the  bed  of  the  waterway  shall  be  avoided  and  the  back  filling  shall  be 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN.  145 

so  done  as  not  to  increase  the  cost  of  future  dredging  for  navigation.  If  the 
material  is  to  be  deposited  in  the  harbor  of  New  York,  or  in  its  adjacent  or 
tributary  waters,  or  in  Long  Island  Sound,  a  permit  therefor  must  be  pre- 
viously obtained  from  the  supervisors  of  New  York  Harbor.  Army  Building, 
New  York  City. 

.">.  That  there  shall  be  no  unreasonable  interference  with  navigation  by  the 
work  herein  authorized. 

6.  That  if  inspections  or  any  other  operations  by  the  United  States  are  neces- 
sary in  the  interests  of  navigation,  all  expenses  connected  therewith  shall  be 
borne  by  the  permittee. 

7.  That  the  permittee  assumes  all   responsibility  for  damages  to  the  work 
or   structure  herein   authorized   and   for  damage   caused   by  it  or   by  work  of 
the  permittee  in  connection   therewith   to  passing  vessels  or  other  craft,  and 
shall  not  attempt  in  any  way  to  prevent  free  use  by  the  public  of  the  area  at 
or  adjacent  to  the  work  or  structure. 

8.  That  if  future  opera t "OILS  by  the  United   States  require  an  alteration  in 
the  position  of  the  structure  or  work  herein  authorized  or  if.  in  the  opinion 
of  the  Secretary  of  War.  it  shall  cause  unreasonable  obstruction  to  the  free 
navigation  of  said  water,  the  permittee  will  be  required,  upon  due  notice  from 
the  Secretary  of  War.  to  remove  or  alter  the  structural   work  or  obstructions 
caused  thereby,  without  expense  to  the  United  States,  so  as  to  render  naviga- 
tion reasonably  free.  easy,  and   unobstructed:  and  if.  upon  the  expiration  or 
revocation  of  this  permit,  the  structure,  fill,  excavation,  or  other  modification 
of  "the  water  course  hereby  authorized  shall  not  be  completed,  the  permittee 
shall,  without  expense  to  the  United  States  and  to  such  an  extent  and  in  such 
time  and  manner  as  the  Secretary  of  War  may   require,   remove  all   or  any 
portion   of  the  uncompleted    structure  or  fill   and   restore   to   its   former  con- 
dition   the   navigable  capacity    of   the   watercourse.      No   claim    shall    be    made 
against  the  United  States  on  account  of  any  such  removal  or  alteration. 

'.).  That  if  the  display  of  lights  and  signals  on  any  work  hereby  authorized 
is  not  otherwise  provided  for  by  law  such  lights  and  signals  as  may  be  pre- 
scribed by  the  Bureau  of  Lighthouses,  Department  of  Commerce,  shall  be  in- 
stalled and  maintained  by  and  at  the  expense  of  the  permittee. 

10.  That  the  permittee  shall  notify  the  said  district  engineer  at  what  time 
the  work  will  be  commenced,  and  as  far  in  advance  of  the  t;me  of  commence- 
ment  as  the  said   district   engineer   may   specify,    ami    shall   also   notify   him 
promptly  in  writing  of  the  commencement  of  work,  suspension  of  work,  if  for  a 
period  of  more  than  one  week,  resumption  of  work,  and  its  completion. 

11.  That    adequate   measures   satisfactory   to   the  district  engineer  shall  be 
taken  by  the  permittee  for  furnishing  him  prompt  warnings  of  floods  and  for 
maintaining  at  the  site  of  the  said  structure  material  and  equipment  sufficient 
for  its  prompt  removal. 

12.  That  arrangements   satisfactory  to  the   Secretary  of  War  shall  be  con- 
tinued to  dispense  as  speedily  as  possible  with  the  necessity  for  placing  diver- 
sion dams   in   said  river  and   that  the  said  district   shall   report   in  detail  to 
the  said  district  engineer  on  the  1st  and  loth  days  of  each  month  while  This 
authorization  continues  in  force  what  measures  are  proposed  for  that  purpose 
and  the  progress  made  thereon. 

13.  That  unless  previously  revoked  or  specifically  extended  this  authorization 
shall  expire  July  1,  1921. 

In  witness  whereof  the  Chief  of  Engineers  has  hereunto  set  his  hand  this 
29th  day  of  May.  1920,  and  the  Secretary  of  War  on  the  1st  day  of  June.  1920, 
the  former  in  token  that  he  has  recommended  the  authorization  of  the  afore- 
said work  by  the  Secretary  of  War  in  accordance  with  the  terms  and  condi- 
tions above  recited. 

NKWTON  P.  BAKKR, 

Secret  fir}/  of  W'ir. 
LAXSIM;   II.  BKACH, 
^f(ljo|•  General.  Chief  of 


146  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX. 

WEIR  BOXDS. 

A  permit  issued  by  the  Secretary  of  War  under  date  of  June  30,  1921,  for  repairing 
and  rebuilding  a  temporary  diversion  weir  in  the  Colorado  River  until  July  1,  1922, 
was  laid  before  the  board  and  ordered  placed  on  file. 

Director  Brockman  introduced  the  following  preamble  and  resolution  and  moved 
its  adoption: 

"Whereas  in  accordance  with  a  resolution  adopted  by  the  board  of  directors  on  July 
6,  1921,  the  president  and  secretary  of  the  district  executed  a  cosurety  bond  with  the 
Fidelity  &  Deposit  Co.  of  Maryland,  the  United  States  Fidelity  &  Guaranty  Co.  and 
the  National  Surety  Co.  for  $500,000  to  the  United  States  of  America  and  the  Yuma 
County  Water  Users'  Association,  as  required  by  the  agreement  entered  into  by  the 
Imperial  Irrigation  District  and  the  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association  under 
date  of  June  10,  1920,  by  which  the  aforesaid  association  waives  its  objection  to  the 
rebuilding  and  maintaining  of  the  weir  in  the  Colorado  River  for  the  years  1921  and 
1922,  said  bond  being  in  words  and  figures  as  follows: 

"'Know  all  men  by  these  presents,  that  we,  the  undersigned  Imperial  Irrigation 
District,  an  irrigation  district  organized  and  existing  under  and  by  virtue  of  the  laws 
of  the  State  of  California,  as  principal,  and  Fidelity  &  Deposit  Co.  of  Maryland,  a 
corporation  organized  and  existing  under  and  by  \irtue  of  the  laws  of  the  State  of 
Maryland  and  the  United  States  Fidelity  &  Guaranty  Co.,  a  corporation  organized 
and  existing  under  and  by  virtue  of  the  laws  of  the  State  of  Maryland,  and  National 
Surety  Co..  a  corporation  organized  and  existing  under  and  by  virtue  of  the  laws  of 
the  State  of  New  York,  as  sureties,  are  held  and  firmly  bound  unto  the  United  States 
of  America  and  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association,  a  corporation  organized  and 
existing  under  and  by  virtue  of  the  laws  of  the  State  of  Arizona,  as  obligees,  in  the 
penal  sum  of  $500,000,  well  and  truly  to  be  paid  to  the  said  obligees  and  'or  either  of 
them,  their  successors  or  assigns,  for  which  payment  well  and  truly  to  be  made  we 
bind  ourselves  and  our  successors  by  these  presents. 

'• ' Sealed  with  our  seals  this  8th  day  of  July,  1921 . : 

' '  The  condition  of  the  above  obligation  is  such,  that — 

"Whereas,  on  the  30th  day  of  June,  1921,  the  United  States  of  America,  acting 
through  the  Secretary  of  War,  issued  a  certain  permit  to  the  said  Imperial  irrigation 
district  for  authority  to  repair  and  rebuild  a  temporary  diversion  dam,  or  weir,  con- 
structed by  the  said  district  across  the  Colorado  River,  at  or  near  Hanlons  Heading, 
Calif.,  under  War  Department  permit  dated  February7  14,  1917,  and  to  maintain  the 
same  until  July  1,  1922,  if  said  permit  is  not  previously  revoked  or  specifically 
extended;  and 

''Whereas  the  said  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association  has  heretofore  stipulated 
that  a  certain  temporary  restraining  order  subsisting  in  cause  No.  2429  in  the  superior 
court  of  Yuma  County,  State  of  Arizona,  wherein  said  association  and  others  are  plain- 
tiffs and  said  district  and  others  are  defendants  may  be  so  modified  as  to  permit  the 
repairing,  rebuilding,  and  maintaining  of  said  temporary  dam  or  weir  during  the 
period  beginning  July  1,  1920,  and  ending  July  1,  1922  (unless  sooner  removed  during 
said  period  because  of  imminent  danger  to  the  lands,  works,  or  property  of  the  United 
States  of  America  or  members  of  said  association  in  accordance  with  the  provisions 
contained  in  paragraph  6  of  that  certain  agreement  entered  into  between  said  associa- 
tion and  said  district  as  of  June  10,  1920),  without  the  same  being  in  violation  of  said 
restraining  order,  and  has  further  stipulated  that  said  cause  shall  not  be  further 
prosecuted  during  said  period :  and 

"Whereas  it  is  further  provided  in  said  stipulation  and  in  said  agreement  of  June 
10,  1920,  as  a  condition  precedent  to  its  taking  effect,  that  the  said  district  shall  give 
a  bond  to  the  United  States  of  America  and  said  association  as  joint  and  several 
obligees  in  the  penal  sum  of  ?500,000,  satisfactory  to  said  association,  to  reimburse  the 
United  States  and  said  association  and  its  constituent  members  for  any  damage  which 
may  result  from  the  repairing,  rebuilding,  or  maintenance  of  said  dam  or  weir  and 
further  conditioned  that  said  district  shall,  on  or  before  July  1.  1922,  entirely  remove 
or  cause  to  be  entirely  removed  any  and  all  parts  of  said  dam  or  weir  and  all  parts  of 
all  other  dams  and  weirs  place  !  in  .--aid  river  at  or  near  Tianlons  Heading  by  said 
district  or  its  predecessors  in  ownership,  operation,  or  maintenance  of  the  Imperial 
Valley  (Imperial  County.  Calif,  i  irrigation  project,  and  all  piles  and  piling,  rock  and 
brush,  anchors,  guys  and  ties,  and  all  other  materials  whatsoever  placed  in  said  river 
at  or  near  said  I'anlons  Heading  by  said  district  or  its  said  predecessors  at  any  time 
whatsoever,  for  the  purpose  of  which  had  the  effect  of  impeding  the  flow  of  said  river 
and  raising  the  height  of  the  waters  thereof  so  that  the  same  would,  or  did,  more 
freely  flow  into  the  irrigation  canals  of  said  district  or  its  said  predecessors  and  that 
such  removal  shall  be  to  the  extent  that  all  the  waters  of  the  said  river  shall  at  all 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLOEADO   RIVER  BASIN".  147 

times  flow  as  freely  to  the  southward  as  said  waters  did  flow  prior  to  the  placing  of 
any  said  obstructions  therein  by  said  district  or  its  predecessors  and  so  as  not  to 
endanger  the  property  of  said  association  or  the  property  of  its  constituent  members. 

"Now,  therefore,  if  the  said  Imperial  irrigation  district  shall  reimburse  the  United 
States  of  America  and  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association  and  its  constituent 
members  for  any  damage  caused  by  or  resulting  from  the  erection  or  maintenance  of 
said  dam  or  weir,  to  the  lands,  works,  or  property  of  the  United  States  of  America  or 
said  association  or  its  constituent  members,  and  shall,  on  or  before  July  1,  1922, 
entirely  remove  or  cause  to  be  entirely  removed  any  and  all  portions  of  said  dam  or 
weir  and  other  dams  and  weirs  placed  in  said  river  at  or  near  said  ITanlons  Heading, 
by  said  district  or  its  predecessors  in  ownership,  operation,  or  maintenance  of  the 
Imperial  Valley  (Imperial  County,  Calif. ^  irrigation  project,  and  all  piles  and  piling, 
rock  and  brush,  anchors,  guys  and  ties,  and  all  materials  whatsoever  placed  in  said 
river  at  said  point  by  said  district  or  its  predecessors,  at  any  time  whatsoever,  for  the 
purpose  of  which  had  the  effect  of  impeding  the  flow  of  said  river  and  raising  the 
•  height  of  the  waters  thereof,  so  that  the  same  would,  or  did,  more  freely  flow  into  the 
irrigation  canals  of  said  district,  or  its  said  predecessors,  and  such  removal  shall  be  to 
the  extent  that  all  the  waters  of  said  river  shall  at  all  times  flow  as  freely  to  the  south- 
ward as  said  waters  did  flow  prior  to  the  placing  of  any  of  said  obstructions  in  said 
river  by  said  district  or  its  predecessors  and  so  as  not  to  endanger  the  property  of  said 
association  or  the  property  of  its  constituent  members,  then  this  obligation  shall  be 
null  and  void;  otherwise  to  be  in  full  force  and  effect. 

•'Suit  mav  be  brought  upon  this  bond  by  either  the  United  States  of  America  or 
the  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association,  acting  either  jointly  or  severally,  and 
successive  actions  may  be  brought  by  either  or  both  of  said  parties,  provided,  however, 
that  the  Imperial  irrigation  district  must  be  made  a  party  to  any  action  brought  on 
this  bond,  by  due  service  of  process  and  the  obligation  of  the  Imperial  irrigation  dis- 
trict hereunder  shall  only  be  limited  by  the  full  amount  of  the  aggregate  of  all  judg- 
ments which  may  be  rendered  against  it  and  that  the  obligation  of  each  of  the  three 
sureties  herein  shall  be  limited  respectively  to  one-third  of  the  amount  of  any  final 
judgment  or  judgments  which  may  be  rendered  against  the  Imperial  irrigation  dis- 
trict, not  exceeding,  however,  the  sum  of  $166,666.67  for  each  surety,  but  nothing 
herein  contained,  nor  shall  any  judgment  or  judgments,  recovery,  or  recoveries 
hereunder,  be  deemed  taken  or  held  to  bar  the  maintaining  of  any  other  action  or 
actions  against  said  district  by  said  association  or  its  constituent  members,  should  it, 
or  they,  be  damaged  in  a  greater  amount  than  the  principal  sum  of  this  obligation,  as 
the  result  of  the  erection  or  maintenance  of  said  dam  or  weir  or  the  maintenance  of 
any  said  obstructions  in  said  river  or  failure  to  entirely  remove  them  or  any  of  them  as 
herein  conditioned  or  as  may  be  agreed  between  said  district  and  said  association. 

"This  bond  shall  be  operative  to  reimburse  the  obligees  herein  for  any  damage 
resulting  to  them  or  either  of  them  from  the  erection  or  maintenance  of  said  dam  or 
weir  under  said  permit  and  said  stipulation  of  whatsoever  materials  the  same  may 
be  constructed  and  notwithstanding  that  said  permit  and  said  stipulation  or  either 
of  them  may  be  hereafter  so  modified  as  to  permit  said  dam  or  weir  to  be  constructed 
of  different  materials  than  those  now  contemplated  by  the  principal  obligor  or  the 
said  obligees. 

"There  shall  be  included  in  and  added  to  any  judgment  recovered  hereunder  by 
said  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association  the  sum  of  $1,000  to  reimburse  the  said 
association  for  the  costs  and  expenses  of  recovering  such,  as  well  as  such  additional 
sum,  as  attorneys'  fees,  as  may  be  deemed  reasonable  by  the  court  trying  the  action 
in  which  said  judgment  may  be  recovered,  but  shall  not  add  to  the  liability  of  said 
sureties  or  either  of  them,  each  of  their  liability  hereunder  being  limited  as  herein- 
before stipulated. 

"IMPERIAL  IRRIGATION  DISTRICT, 
"By  J.  S.  NICKERSON,  President. 

"Attest:  F.  H.  MC!VER.    [SEAL.] 

"FIDELITY  &  DEPOSIT  Co.  OF  MARYLAND, 
"By  HARRY  D.  VANDEVEER, 

"Attorney  in  fact. 

"Attest:  WT.  M.  WALKER,  Agent.    [SEAL.] 

"[SEAL.]  UNITED  STATES  FIDELITY  &  GUARANTY  Co., 

"By  W.  H.  SCHROEDER, 

"Attorney  in  fact. 

"[SEAL.]  NATIONAL  SURETY  Co., 

"By  OATESBY  C.  THOM, 

"Attorney  in  fact. 


148  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

"Now,  therefore,  be  it  resolved  that  the  action  of  the  President  and  Secretary  in 
executing  and  delivering  to  the  United  States  of  America  and  Yuma  County  Water 
Users'  Association  said  bond  in  the  sumjof  $500,000  be,  and  the  same  is  hereby,  accepted, 
approved,  ratified,  and  confirmed." 

The  foregoing  motion  was  seconded  by  Director  Rose  and  prevailed. 

IMPERIAL  IRRIGATION  DISTRICT, 

Office  of  Secretary,  ss: 

This  is  to  certify  that  the  foregoing  is  a  full,  true,  and  correct  copy  of  a  resolution 
adopted  by  the  board  of  directors  of  said  district  at  their  regular  adjourned  meeting 
on  Wednesday,  July  6,  1921. 

In  witness  whereof  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand  and  the  seal  of  said  district  this 
14th  day  of  July,  1921. 

F.  H.  McIvER, 
Secretary  Imperial  Irrigation  District. 


AGREEMENT. 

1.  This  indenture,  made  this  10th  day  of  June,  1920,  between  Imperial  Irrigation 
District,  a  municipal  corporation  duly  organized  and  existing  under  the  laws  of  the 
State  of  California,  and  doing  business  in  Imperial  County.  State  of  California,  herein- 
after called  and  referred  to  as  the  district,  and  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association, 
a  corporation  duly  organized  and  existing  under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  Arizonia.  and 
doing  business  at  Yuma,  State  of  Arizona,  acting  for  and  on  behalf  of  its,  and  all  of  its, 
constituent  members  and  shareholders;  hereinafter  called  and  referred  to  as  the 
association,  Witnesseth: 

2.  Whereas  the  district  is  engaged  in  the  business  of  appropriating  and  diverting 
irrigation  waters  from  the  flow  of  the  Colorado  River  at  a  point  in  said  river  known  as 
Hanlon's  Heading,  at  or  near  fractional  sections  35  and  36,  township  16  south,  range  21 
east,  S.  B.  M.,  in  Yuma  County,  State  of  Arizona,  for  the  irrigation  and  reclamation  of 
many  hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres  in  Imperial  Valley.  Imperial  County,  State  of 
California,  known  as  Imperial  Valley  irrigation  project:  and 

3.  Whereas,  in  order  to  secure  a  sufficient  flow  of  irrigation  water  to  properly  irrigate 
and  reclaim  said  lands,  and  to  prevent  the  same  from  returning  to  their  original  desert 
condition,  it  is  now  necessary  to  erect,  and  temporarily  maintain,  during  low-water 
periods  on  said  river,  a  dam.  or  weir,  in  said  river,  at  or  near  said  Hanlons  Heading;  and 

4.  Whereas  the  installation  and  maintenance  of  said  dam  tends  to  create  such  a 
condition  in  the  flow  of  the  waters  of  said  Colorado  River  as  to  endanger  the  works  of 
the  Yuma  project  of  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service,  and  the  lands  and  prop- 
erty of  the  association  and  its  constituent  members  and  shareholders;  and 

2.  Whereas  the  association  has  granted  its  permission  that  a  weir  or  dam  may  be 
constructed  and  maintained  at  said  point  in  said  river  from  July  1,  1920,  until  July  1, 
1922.  subject  to  certain  conditions,  provisos,  and  exceptions  hereinafter  more  fully 
set  forth;  and  has  stipulated  and  agreed  that  a  certain  temporary  restraining  order 
heretofore  issued  out  of  the  Superior  Court  of  the  State  of  Arizona,  in  case  No.  2429, 
and  now  in  force  and  effect  in  said  court,  wherein  the  said  association  and  others  are 
plaintiffs  and  the  said  district  and  others  are  defendants,  restraining  and  enjoining 
the  district  herein  from  erecting  and  maintaining  any  weir  or  dam  at  said  point,  shall 
be  so  modified  as  to  permit  the  erection  and  maintenance  of  a  weir  or  dam  therein 
during  said  last-mentioned  period,  and  not  to  further  prosecute  said  suit  during  said 
period. 

6.  Now,  therefore,  the  said  district,  in  consideration  of  the  foregoing,  does  here- 
by promise,  undertake  and  agree  that,  it  it  becomes  necessary,  for  the  accom- 
plishment of  said  purposes,  to  erect  and  temporarily  maintain  a  dam,  or  weir,  in  and 
across  the  Colorado  River,  at  or  near  said  Hanlons  Heading,  as  hereinbefore  described ; 
that  it  shall  construct  the  same  out  of  brush,  without  the  use  of  any  rock  whatsoever, 
and  that  said  brush  shall  be  erected  and  maintained  on  the  top  of  the  crest  of  the  rock 
dam  and  weir  heretofore  erected  by  the  district  so  as  to  hold  the  water  at  no  greater 
height  than  is  necessary  for  the  diversion  of  the  amount  of  water  actually  required 
for  the  irrigation  of  the  lands  of  said  district,  and  that  said  bruch  weir,  or  dam,  and  the 
materials  composing  the  same,  shall  be  held  and  maintained  in  place  by  a  system  of 
piling  driven  through  and  erected  upon  the  crest  of  said  rock  dam  or  as  near  thereto  as 
practicable;  if  necessary  said  system  of  piling  to  be  used  in  conjunction  with  certain 
guy  ropes  and  ties  made  fast  to  certain  dolphin  anchors  erected  in  said  river  immedi- 
ately above  said  rock  dam;  the  height  to  which  the  dam  is  to  be  maintained  and  the 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN.  149 

extent  of  said  system  of  piling  to  be  subject  to  control  by  the  project  manager  of  the 
Yuma  project;  and  the  district  further  promises,  agrees;  and  undertakes  to  remove  all 
of  said  brush  dam,  or  weir,  from  out  of  said  river  on  or  prior  to,  July  1.  1922,  and  at 
any  other  time  between  said  July  1,  1920,  and  July  1,  1922;  that  W.  W.  Schlecht, 
project  manager  of  the  Yuma  project  of  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service,  or 
A.  Y.  Greer,  president  of  the  association,  or  Col.  F.  B.  Downing,  district  engineer 
United  States  Army,  or  their  successors  in  office  shall  deem  the  maintenance  of  said 
dam  to  in  any  way  endanger  any  of  the  works  of  said  Yuma  project,  or  any  of  the 
lands  or  property  of  the  association,  or  its  shareholders  and  constituent  members,  or 
any  land  within  said  Yuma  project  on  either  side  of  said  Colorado  River;  and  the 
district  hereby  undertakes  and  agrees  to  keep  and  maintain  at  or  near  said  dam  a 
sufficient  amount  of  explosives  to  immediately  blow  out  and  remove  said  dam  to  such 
an  extent  as  will  permit  the  free  flow  of  the  Colorado  River  to  the  southward,  so  that 
the  same  will  not  endanger  any  of  said  property. 

7.  And  the  said  district  further  stipulates  and  agrees  that  the  permission  so  given  to 
erect  and  temporarily  maintain  such  a  dam  or  weir  in  the  Colorado  River  at  said  point 
and  the  permission  heretofore  given  for  the  erection  and  maintenance  of  dams  and 
weirs  across  the  Colorado  River  at  or  near  said  point,  and  their  erection  and  mainte- 
nance, and  the  giving,  in  the  future,  of  permission  to  erect  and  maintain  such  dams 
and  weirs,  shall  not  be  taken,  held,  or  deemed,  nor  shall  either  of  them  be  taken, 
held,  or  deemed,  not  to  be  of  irreparable  injury  to  the  association,  its  shareholders  and 
constituent  members:  and  the  granting  of  said  permission  and  the  erection  and  main- 
tenance of  said  dams  or  weirs  shall  be  without  prejudice  to  the  right  of  the  association, 
its  shareholders  and  constituent  members,  to  have  entered  in  said  suit  No.  2429  or  any 
other  proceeding  in  any  other  court  of  competent  jurisdiction,  upon  due  and  sufficient 
evidence,  a  decree  permanently  restraining  the  district  from  constructing  and  main- 
taining such  weirs  or  weir  or  any  weir,  dam  or  dams,  across  said  river. 

8.  And  the  district,  in  consideration  of  the  promises  as  hereinbefore  set  forth,  does 
hereby  further  promise,  agree,  and  undertake  to  pay  to  the  association,  its  share- 
holders and  constituent  members,  all  damages  that  may  result  to  them,  or  to  either 
of  them,  from  injury  to  their  person  or  property  because  of  the  erection  or   mainte- 
nance of  said  brush  dam  or  weir  or  the  erection  and  maintenance  of  the  rock  base  upon 
which  the  same  shall  be  constructed  as  hereinfore  described,  and  the  district  further 
promises,  undertakes,  and  agrees  to  pay  the  association,  its  shareholders  and  constitu- 
ent members  any  and  all  damages  that  may  result  to  them,  or  either  of  them,  because 
of  the  erection  or  maintenance  of  the  remaining  portions  of  all  or  any  of  the  rock  dams 
or  weirs  heretofore  placed  in  said  Colorado  River  at  or  near  said  point,  including 
what  is  known  as  the  Clark  Dam  or  Weir. 

9.  And  it  is  further  stipulated  and  agreed  that  the  association,  or  either  or  any  of 
its  constituent  members  or  shareholders,  may  sue  hereunder  in  their  own  right  and 
without  joining  any  other  party  hereto  as  a  party  plaintiff:  Provided,  however.  That  if 
more  than  one  of  the  said  shareholders  or  constituent  members  should  separately  sue 
the  district  for  such  damage  all  of  said  actions  so  brought  in  the  same  court  may  be 
consolidated  and  tried  as  one  action,  each  plaintiff  recovering  the  amount  of  damage 
that  he  or  she  shall  have  suffered,  as  finally  determined  by  such  court. 

10.  The  district,  for  and  in  consideration  of  said  premises,  further  promises,  cove- 
nants, and  agrees  to  entirely  remove  from  out  of  the  bed  of  the  Colorado  River,  on  or 
before  December  30,  1922,  all  and  all  parts  of  any  and  all  darns  and  weirs,  piles  and 
piling,  rock  and  brush,  anchors,  guys,  ties,  and  all  other  material  whatsoever  placed 
or  caused  to  be  placed  therein  by  the  district  or  its  predecessors  in  the  ownership  and 
operation  of  said  Imperial  Valley  irrigation  project  at  any  time  whatsoever  for  the 
purpose  of  impeding  the  flow  of  said  river  and  raising  the  height  of  the  waters  thereof 
so  that  the  same  would  more  freely  flow  into  the  irrigation  canals  of  the  district,  or 
any  of  its  predecessors,  and  to  the  extent  that  all  of  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  River 
shall  flow  as  freely  to  the  southward  as  said  waters  did  flow  prior  to  the  placing  of  any 
obstructions  in  the  bed  thereof  by  the  district,  or  any  of  its  said  predecessors. 

11.  It  is  understood  and  agreed  that  the  district  shall  furnish  a  satisfactory  surety 
bond  in  the  sum  of  $500,000  to  the  United  States  of  America  and  the  association,  as 
joint  and  several  obligees,  to  reimburse  them  for  any  damage  resulting  from  the  erec- 
tion or  maintenance  of  said  dam  or  weir  and  conditioned  for  the  removal  of  all  of  said 
obstructions  from  said  river:  and  that  a  recovery  or  recoveries  on  said  bond  shall  not 
be  a  bar  to  any  action  or  actions  by  the  association  or  its  constituent  members,  or  any 
of  them,  in  the  event  that  they  or  either  of  them  should  be  damaged  because  of  the 
district's  breach  of  any  of  the  terms  or  covenants  of  this  agreement,  it  being  under- 

I  stood  and  agreed  that  the  district  undertakes,  promises,  and  agrees  to  pay  all  the 

"  damage  that  may  result  bee  ause  of  its  breach  of  any,  or  all,  of  the  terms,  conditions, 

and  covenants  of  this  agreement,  notwithstanding  the  execution  and  delivery  of  any 


150  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    I5ASIX. 

bond,  or  bonds,  or  any  recovery  thereon.  And  in  the  event  of  damage  accruing,  and 
said  bond  becoming  exhausted  in  whole  or  in  part,  during  the  life  of  this  agreement, 
the  district  agrees  to  furnish  additional  security  and  assurance  so  that  there  will 
always  be  during  the  life  of  this  agreement  security  against  damage  to  the  association 
in  the  sum  of  8500,000. 

12.  In  consideration  of  the  foregoing  premises  the  district  hereby  agrees  to  hold 
the  association  harmless  in  the  event  it  may  be  required  or  compelled  to  pay  the  rent 
payable  on  April  1,  1921,  and  April  1,  1922,  reserved  in  that  certain  lease  for  trie  term  of 
three  years  entered  into  under  date  of  April  15. 1920,  between  Agnes  C.  Heineman  and 
husband  and  the  association  for  certain  lands  lying  west  of  the  United  States  Reclama- 
tion .Service  levee  in  S.  36,  T.  16  S.  R..  21  E.  S.'B.  M..  in  Yuma  County,  Ariz.,  and  the 
district  further  agrees  to  pay  to  the  association  on  the  execution  and  delivery  of  this 
instrument  the  sum  of  $2.000,  said  sum  being  rent  for  the  last-described  tract  of  land 
heretofore,  on  April  1,  1920,  paid  to  said  Heineman,  and  the  district  further  agrees  to 
hold  the  association  free  and  harmless  from  all  costs,  expense,  liability,  and  damage 
accruing  or  resulting  to  the  association  because  of  any  lease,  license,  or  permit  given 
or  granted,  expressly  or  impliedly,  by  this  instrument,  or  by  assignment  of,  or  sub- 
letting under,  said  lease,  or  otherwise  by  the  association  to  the  district  for  the  erection 
or  maintenance  of  said  temporary  dam  or  weir,  or  for  the  erection  or  maintenance  of 
any  structure,  or  structures  on  said  land  for  the  erection  or  maintenance  of  said  dam  or 
weir. 

13.  The  district  ftirther  agrees,  as  a  condition  subsequent  to  promptly  and  with 
diligence  and  in  good  faith  take  such  necessary  steps  as  shall  be  required  under  the 
laws  of  the  State  of  California  to  procure,  on  or  before  January  1,  1921,  funds  sufficient 
for  the  procuring  and  construction  of  another  heading  and  diversion  structures  with  a 
sufficient  aqueduct  on  the  Colorado  River  at  Laguna  Dam.  in  accordance  with  the 
terms  of  the  contract  between  the  district  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  dated 
October  23,  1918.     In  the  event  of  the  district  failing  to  comply  with  the  terms  of  this 
condition  subsequent,  the  association  may,  at  its  option,  declare  this  agreement  null 
and  A'oid  and  revoke  all  license  and  permits  granted  hereunder.     And  in  the  event  of 
the  procuring  said  funds  the  said  district  further  covenants  and  agrees  within  three 
months  after  the  procuring  of  said  funds  to  begin  in  good  faith  (strikes,  injunctions, 
and  acts  of  God  excepted)  the  construction  of  the  necessary  works  for  the  procuring  of 
said  other  heading  and  diversion  point  for  taking  its  irrigating  water  from  the  Colorado 
River,  as  set  forth  in  this  paragraph,  and  to  diligently  prosecute  such  construction  to 
completion;  otherwise,  to  pay  to  the  association  as  a  penalty  the  sum  of  $500  pet  day 
for  each  day  that  there  shall  be  default  by  the  district  in  complying  with  the  terms  and 
conditions  set  forth  in  this  paragraph:  Provided,  however,  That  nothing  in  this  para- 
graph contained  shall  be  deemed,  taken,  or  held  as  being  obligatory  upon  the  association 
to  accept  said  penalty,  but  that  upon  such  default  the  association  may  revoke  all 
permission  license  and  leave  granted  by  this  contract  as  a  whole;  but  in  no  event  shall 
anything  in  this  paragraph  contained  be  deemed,  taken  or  held  to  be  any  waiver  of  the 
right  of  the  association,  or  any  of  its  constituent  members  or  shareholders,  to  sue  for 
and  recover  any  damage  accruing  to  it,  or  them,  or  either  of  them,  because  of  the 
breach  of  any  of  the  terms  of  this  contract;  and  nothing 'in  this  paragraph  contained  shall 
be  deemed,  taken  or  held  to  relieve  the  district  from  liability  because  of  the  breach  of 
the  covenants  of  this  contract:  Provided  further ,  however,  That  nothing  herein  con- 
tained shall  be  deemed,  taken  or  held  by  any  court,  tribunal,  board,  bureau,  person  or 
corporation,  whether  a  party  to  this  contract  or  not,  as  a  waiver  by  the  association  of 
its  right  to  sue  for  and  recover,  either  at  law  or  in  equity  or  by  other  means,  the  sum  of 
$1,600,000  agreed  to  be  paid  by  the  district  to  the  United  States  for  the  use  of  said 
Laguna  Dam,  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  contract  between  the  said  district  and 
the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  under  date  of  October  23,  1918,  but  the  association  dis- 
claims any  right  to  recover  said  sum  from  said  district. 

14.  It  is  agreed  that  during  the  erection  and  maintenance  of  said  dam  or  weir  the 
association  may  employ  and  retain  an  inspector  or  inspectors  on  said  work  to  ascer- 
tain and  determine  if  such  erection  and  maintenance  is  being  operated  and  main- 
tained in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  this  agreement,  and  said  district  agrees  to 
reimburse  the  association  for  such  reasonable  compensation  as  may  be  paid  by  it  to 
such  inspectors,  not  to  exceed  $24  per  diem.     And  the  said  project  manager  or  his 
successors  in  office,  in  person  or  by  subordinates,  may  at  any  time  during  the  life  of 
this  agreement  enter  upon  said  woVks  or  any  portion  thereof  for  the  purpose  of  ascer- 
taining if  the  same  or  any  portion  thereof  are  being  constructed  and  maintained  in 
accordance  with  the  terms  and  conditions  of  this  agreement,  and  in  the  event,  of  their 
being  constructed  or  maintained  in  violation  of  said  terms  or  conditions  to  assume  con- 
trol  and  direction  of  such  works  and  their  construction  and  maintenance  and  to  oper- 
ate the  same,  in  whole  or  in  part,  as  by  this  agreement  prescribed,  provided  always 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN.  151 

that  such  control,  direction,  or  operation  shall  not  result  in  denying  lo  the  district  a 
sufficient  supply  of  irrigation  water  for  the  needs  of  said  Imperial  Valley  irrigation 
project,  except  in  the  emergency  contemplated  and  provided  for  in  paragraph  6 
hereof. 

15.  It  is  understood  and  agreed  that  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  district  is  a  munici- 
pal corporation  of  the  State  of  California  it  may  be  necessary  or  appropriate,  in  the 
event  of  the  breach  of  any  of  the  terms  or  covenants  of  this  agreement,  for  the  asso- 
ciation to  sue  hereunder  or  under  said  reimbursement  bond  in  the  State  of  California, 
and  that  such  proceedings,  if  had.  will  result  in  additional  cost  and  expense  to  the 
association;  wherefore  the  district,  in  consideration  thereof  and  said  premises,  hereby 
promises  and  agrees  to  pay  to  the  association,  in  the  event  of  action  being  brought 
hereunder  or  under  said  reimbursement  bond  in  the  State  of  California,  the  sum  of 
$1,000  to  reimburse  the  association  for  the  additional  cost  and  expense  to  it  of  suing 
in  the  State  of  (  alii'ornia  and  such  additional  sum  for  attorney's  fees  as  may  be  deemed 
reasonable  by  the  court  trying  such  action. 

In  witness  whereof  the  said  corporations  have,  by  order  of  their  respective  govern- 
ing bodies,  caused  these  presents  to  be  executed  in  their  respective  corporate  names 
by  their  presidents  and  secretaries  and  attested  by  their  seals  the  day  and  year  first 
above  written,  in  duplicate. 

IMPERIAL  IRRIGATION  DISTRICT. 

YUMA  COUNTY  WATER  USERS'  ASSOCIATION. 


STIPULATION. 

«      jf 

In  the  Superior  Court  of  Yuma  County,  State  of  Arizona.  Yuma  County  Water  Users' 
Association  et  al.,  plaintiffs,  v.  Imperial  Irrigation  District  et  al.,  defendants. 
It  is  hereby  stipulated  by  and  between  the  above-entitled  parties  that  the  defendant, 
Imperial  Irrigation  District,  may  have  to  and  including  the  18th  day  of  June,  1917, 
in  which  to  prepare,  file,  and  present  its  objections  to  the  filing  of  plaintiff's  so-called 
supplemental  complaint;  and  further  that  the  defendant.  Imperial  Irrigation  District, 
may  have  to  and  including  the  2d  day  of  July,  1917,  in  which  to  prepare,  serve,  and 
file  its  answer  to  plaintiff's  amended  complaint;  and  if  defendant's  objections  to  plain- 
tiffs supplemental  complaint  are  overruled,  in  part  01  in  whole,  the  defendant.  Impe- 
rial Irrigation  District,  may  have  to  and  including  the  25th  day  of  June,  1917.  in 
which  to  prepare,  serve,  and  file  its  answer  to  plaintiffs  supplemental  complaint. 

The  above  time  is  heieby  shortened,  at  the  option  of  attorney  for  the  plaintiff,  upon 
giving  the  attorney  for  the  defendant,  Imperial  Irrigation  District.  10  days'  notice. 

THOS.  MOLLOY, 
Attorney  f 01  Plaintiff. 
PHIL  D.  SWING, 
Attorney  for  Defendant,  Imperial  Irrigation  Distriet. 

MODIFIED  RESTRAINING  ORDER. 

In  the  Superior  Court,  Yuma  County,  State  of  Arizona,  Yuma  County  Water  User's 
Association  et  al.,  plaintiffs,  v.  Imperial  Irrigation  District  et  al.,  defendants. 

In  the  above-entitled  action,  the  parties  hereto  having  agreed  to  the  same,  the  tem- 
porary restraining  order  heretofore  issued  is  hereby  modified  and  made  to  read  as 
follows: 

On  reading  the  verified  amended  complaint  herein  and  the  stipulation  of  the  parties 
herein,  it  is  hereby  ordered  as  follows:  Upon  the  defendants  giving  bond  in  the  sum 
of  s|  ()0. 000  for  the  faithful  observance  hereof,  that  the  defendants  are  permitted  to 
construct  their  proposed  dam  or  weir,  but  in  the  construction  of  the  same  they  are 
hereby  commanded,  enjoined,  and  restrained  from  using  any  rock  in  the  construction 
of  the  said  weir,  except  such  rock  as  may  be  loaded  upon  the  cars  with  the  steam 
shovel  now  in  use  by  said  defendants,  or  another  of  similar  size,  and  from  using  any 
rock  larger  in  size  than  one-half  of  1  cubic  yard ;  and  they  are  further  commanded  to 
commence  the  removal  of  any  piles  or  trestle  placed  by  them  in  the  said  river  not 
later  than  October  1,  191(5.  and  thereafter  to  remove  the  same  with  diligence,  and  in 
all  events  to  remove  the  same  not  later  than  November  1,  1910,  and  also  thereafter 
to  remove  the  other  obstructions  placed  by  the  defendants  in  the  said  river  at  the  time 
and  in  the  manner  directed  by  the  project  engineer  of  the  Yuma  project  of  the  United 
States  Reclamation  Service,  and  in  any  event  shall  remove  the  same  prior  to  January 
1,  1917. 

Done  in  open  court  this  3d  day  of  August.  1916. 

BAXTER,  Judge  of  Said  Court. 
1316— 22— PT  3 6 


152  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

STIPULATION. 

In  the  Superior  Court,  Yuma  County,  State  of  Arizona.  No.  2429.  Yuma  County 

Water  Users'  Association  et  al.,  v.  Imperial  Irrigation  District  et  al. 

In  the  above-entitled  action  it  is  hereby  stipulated  that  the  temporary  restraining 
order  heretofore  issued  may  be  modified  and  made  to  read  as  the  annexed  temporary 
restraining  order. 

It  is  further  stipulated  that  the  defendant,  Imperial  Irrigation  District  hereby 
admits  service  and  summons  herein  and  submits  itself  to  the  jurisdiction  of  said'court, 
and  agrees  to  herein  file  its  demurrer  or  answer  within  20  days  hereafter. 

It  is  further  agreed  that  the  said  cause  will  not  be  tried  until  after  the  1st  day  of 
October,  1916,  and  that  the  plaintiffs  may.  if  they  see  fit,  amend  their  complaint 
herein  so  as  to  ask  for  the  carrying  out  of  this  stipulation  and  the  temporary  injunction 
herein,  and  compel  the  removal  of  the  obstructions  placed  in  the  river  by  the 
defendants. 

THOS.  D.  MOLLOY, 
Attorney  for  Plaintiff. 

M.  W.  CONKIJNG, 

Attorney  for  Defendants. 


STIPULATION. 

In  the  Superior  Court  of  the  State  of  Arizona,  in  and  for  the  county  of  Yuma,  No. 
2429,  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association  et  al.,  plaintiffs,  r.  Imperial  Irriga- 
tion District  et  al.,  defendants. 
The  parties  hereto  hereby  stipulate  as  follows,  to  wit: 

1.  That  the  temporary  restraining  order  heretofore  issued  herein,  now  in  full  force 
and  effect  as  heretofore  modified,  may  be,  and  the  same  is  hereby,  further  modified 
and  shall  remain  in  full  force  and  effect,  as  so  remodified,  until  the  further  order  of 
this  court,  as  follows,  to  wit:  That  the  defendants  are  permitted  to  erect  and  con- 
struct and  temporarily  maintain  across  the  Colorado  River  from  a  point  in  or  near 
fractional  S.  35,  T.  16  S.,  R.  21  E.,  S.  and  B.  meridian,  in  Yuma  County,  State  of 
Arizona,  to  a  point  on  the  California  or  Mexico  side  of  said  river  near  wThat  is  known 
as  Hanlon's  heading  of  the  Imperial  Valley  irrigation  project,  a  brush  dam  or  weir 
on  the  crest  of  what  now  remains  of  a  rock  dam  heretofore  placed  in  said  river  at 
said  point  in  accordance  with  the  stipulation  of  the  parties  hereto,  duly  filed  herein, 
and  in  pursuance  of  the  said  restrianing  order  as  heretofore  modified  and  in  force  and 
effect,  and  to  so  repair  and  rebuild  said  rock  dam,  or  as  near  thereto  as  practicable; 
and  that  said  brush  weir  or  dam,  and  the  materials  composing  the  same,  shall  be  held 
and  maintained  in  place  by  a  system  of  piling  driven  through  and  erected  upon  the 
cre?t  of  said  rock  dam,  or  as  near  thereto  as  practicable,  which  said  system  of  piling 
may  be  in  the  form  of  a  trestle  upon  which  may  be  operated  a  railroad  for  dumping 
material  other  than  rock,  if  necessary  said  system  of  piling  to  be  used  in  conjunction 
with  certain  guy  ropes  and  ties  made  fast  to  certain  dolphin  anchors  erected  in  said 
river  immediately  above  said  rock  dam:  and  that  said  dam  shall  be  constructed 
without  the  placing  of  any  rock  whatsoever  therein,  or  in  connection  therewith,  and 
that  the  same  may  be  kept  and  maintained  by  the  defendants  at  said  point  in  said 
river,  from  July  1,  1919,  until  July  1,  1920:  Provided,  hminrr.  If  during  said  period 
the  Colorado  River,  whether  from  floods  in  the  Gila  River  or  from  other  causes,  rises 
to  such  a  height  as,  in  the  judgment  of  W.  W.  Schlecht,  project  manager  of  the  Yuma 
project  of  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service,  or  his  successor  in  office,  to  immi- 
nently endanger  the  irrigation  works  of  said  Yuma  project,  or  any  of  the  property  of 
the  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association  or  any  of  its  constituent  members,  or 
any  land  or  lands  within  the  said  Yuma  project  on  either  side  of  said  Colorado  River, 
the  said  defendants  shall  immediately  remove,  by  adequate  means,  such  as  blasting, 
said  dam  to  the  extent  that  it  will  permit  the  free  flow  of  the  waters  of  the  Colorado 
River  to  the  southward,  and  thus  remove  all  danger  to  the  property  above  described. 

2.  It  is  further  stipulated,  as  a  condition  precedent  to  this  stipulation  taking  effect. 
that  said  Imperial  Irrigation  District  shall  give  a  bond  to  the  United  States  of  America 
and  Yuma  County  Water  Users'  Association,  as  joint  and  several  obligees,  to  reimburse 
the  United  States  and  said  association  and  its  constituent  members  for  any  damage 
which  may  result  from  the  repairing,  rebuilding,  or  maintaining  of  said  dam  or  weir: 
and  further  conditioned  that  said  district  shall,  on  or  before  April  15.  1921.  entirely 
remove,  or  cause  to  be  entirely  removed,  all  and  all  parts  of  said  dam.  or  weir,  and 
all  parts  of  all  other  dams  and  weirs  placed  in  said  river  at  or  near  said  Hanlon's 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN.  153 

heading  by  said  district,  or  its  predecessors  in  the  ownership,  operation,  or  maintenance 
of  the  Imperial  Valley  (Imperial  County.  Calif..)  irrigation  project,  and  all  piles  and 
piling,  rock  and  brush,  anchors,  guys  and  ties,  and  all  other  materials  whatsoever 
placed  in  said  river  at  or  near  said  Hanlon's  heading  by  said  district,  or  its  said  prede- 
cessors, at  any  time  whatsoever,  for  the  purpose  or  which  had  the  effect  of  impeding 
the  flow  of  said  river  and  raising  the  height  of  the  waters  thereof  so  that  the  same  would 
or  did  more  freely  flow  into  the  irrigation  canals  of  said  district,  or  its  said  predecessors. 
and  that  such  removal  shall  be  to  the  extent  that  all  the  waters  of  the  said  river  shall 
.  at  all  times  flow  a?  freely  to  the  southward  as  said  waters  did  flow  prior  to  the  placing 
of  any  of  said  obstructions  therein  bv  said  district,  or  its  said  predecessors,  and  «o  as 
to  not  endanger  the  property  of  said  association  or  the  property  of  its  constituent 
members. 

3.  And  it  is  further  stipulated  and  agreed  between  the  parties  hereto,  that  the 
granting  of  the  permission  by  the  plaintiffs  herein  to  the  defendants  herein,  to  erect 
and  maintain  said  brush  dam.  as  hereinbefore  stipulated  for.  and  the  entering  into 
this  stipulation,  and  the  modification  of  said  temporary  restraining  order  shall  not  be 
admitted  as  evidence  in  this,  or  any  other  proceeding  whatsoever  between  the  parties 
hereto;  and  it  shall  not  be  taken,  held,  or  deemed  that  the  construction  of  said  weir, 
or  other,  or  like,  weirs  in  the  past  or  in  the  future  is  not.  and  shall  not  be.  of  irreparable 
injury  to  the  Yuma  <  'ounty  Water  Users'  Association,  its  shareholders  and  constituent 
members;  and  it  is  further  stipulated  that  the  granting  of  said  permission,  and  the 
entering  into  this  stipulation,  is  and  shall  be  without  prejudice  to  the  right  of  the 
plaintiffs  in  this  action  to  have  entered  a  decree  upon  a  final  hearing  herein,  and  on 
sufficient  evidence,  permanently  restraining  said  irrigation  district  from  constructing 
such  weir  or  weirs  across  said  river. 

Dated  this  5th  day  of  July,  1919. 

TEMPORARY  RESTRAINING  ORDER. 

In  the  Superior  Court  of  Yuma  County,  State  of  Arizona.  Xo.  2429,  Yuma  County 
Water  Users'  Association  et  al.,  plaintiffs,  c.  Imperial  Irrigation  District  et  al., 
defendants. 

To  Imperial  Irrigation  District.  ('.  R.  /{orL-vood,   Tom  Hines,  John  Doe,  and  Richard 

Roe,  their  agents,  servants,  employees,  and  attorneys: 

It  satisfactorily  appearing,  from  the  reading  of  the  verified  complaint  herein,  that 
if  the  defendants  are  permitted  to  construct  a  dam  across  the  Colorado  River  from  a 
point  in  Yuma  County,  State  of  Arizona,  to  a  point  on  the  Mexican,  or  California  side 
of  said  river,  for  the  purpose  of  raising  and  forcing  the  waters  of  said  river  into  the 
ditches  and  canals  of  the  defendant  Imperial  Irrigation  District,  that  great,  immediate, 
and  irreparable  injury  and  damage  will  result  to  the  plaintiffs  therefrom  by  the 
prevention  thereby  of  the  scouring,  eroding,  and  washing  downward  of  the  bottom  of 
said  river,  thereby  causing  the  waters  of  said  river  to  erode,  wash  away,  and  overflow 
the  levees  which  protect  the  lands  of  the  plaintiffs  and  the  persons  for  whom  they  sue 
herein,  and  thereby  causing  the  water  table  underlying  said  lands  to  be  raised  and 
thereby  impregnating  the  said  land  with  an  excessive  quantity  of  deleterious  salts; 
and  that  if  notice  should  be  given  of  a  hearing  hereon  the  giving  of  notice  of  an  appli- 
cation for  an  interlocutory  writ  of  injunction  and  the  delay  incident  thereto  would 
permit  the  defendants  to  erect  so  much  of  said  proposed  and  threatened  dam  as  would 
result  in  immediate  and  irreparable  injury,  as  aforesaid,  to  the  plaintiffs  and  the  per- 
sons for  whom  they  sue  herein  before  notice  could  be  served  and  a  hearing  had  thereon; 
and  it  further  appearing  that  the  damage  threatened  to  be  inflicted  upon  and  suffered 
by  the  plaintiffs  and  the  persons  for  whom  they  sue  herein  is  not  of  a  nature  to  be 
compensation  by  a  money  judgment,  and  that  the  defendants  can  not,  in  any  event, 
respond  in  damages. 

You  and  each  of  you  are,  therefore,  commanded,  enjoined,  and  restrained,  and  earn 
of  your  agents,  servants,  attorneys,  and  employees  are  commanded,  enjoined,  and 
restrained,  until  the  further  order  of  this  court,  and  without  further  notice,  from  in 
any  way  constructing  or  erecting,  or  attempting  to  construct  or  erect,  a  dam  or  dams 
or  any  obstruction  whatsoever  across  the  Colorado  River  from  a  point  at,  in  or  near 
fractional  section  3">.  T.  10  S..  R.  21  E..  (i.  A  S.  R.  meridian,  in  Yuma  County.  State 
of  Arizona,  or  any  other  point  whatsoever  in  said  Yuma  <  'ounty.  to  a  point  on  the 
California  or  Mexican  side  of  said  river  about  400  feet  below  the  C.  D.  heading,  or  to  any 
other  point  whatsoever  on  the  right  bank  of  said  river  for  the  purpose  of  raising  and 
forcing  the  waters  of  said  river  into  the  ditches  and  canals  of  said  Imperial  Irrigation 
Co.,  or  for  any  purpose  whatsoever;  and  you  are  herein-  commanded  and  enjoined  to 
instantly  cease  and  desist  from  driving  any  piles,  or  doing  any  other  act  whatsoever, 


154    -  DEVELOPMKXT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN. 

in  furtherance  of  the  erection  or  construction  of  any  such  dam  or  dams  or  in  further 
impeding  the  flow  of  said  Colorado  River  upon  plaintiffs  giving  bond  in  $1,000. 

And  you  are  directed  to  show  cause  before  said  court,  in  the  court  room  at  Yuma, 
Ariz.,  on  Thursday  the  LOth  day  of  August,  1916,  why  a  permanent  injunction  shall 
not  issue  restraining  you  from  the  preformance  of  said  acts. 

Done  in  open  court  this  1st  day  of  August,  191(5,  at  the  hour  of  4.55  o'clock  p.  m. 

FRAXK  BAXTER, 
J.iiilyr  oj  sai/l  ( 'm/rt. 

I,  II.  B.  Farmer,  clerk  of  the  superior  court  of  Yuma  County,  State  of  Arizona, 
the  same  being  a  court  of  record,  do  hereby  certify  that  the  bond  mentioned  in  the 
within  order  has  been  filed  and  approved. 

[SEAL.]  H.  B.  FARMER,  Clerk. 


Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Mr.  Nickerson.  do  you  wish  to  present  any  further  facts  to  the 
committee? 

Mr.  Nickerson.  Well,  I  might  say  something  further. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  Can  you  conveniently  remain  over  till  next  week? 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  No;  I  have  made  arrangements  to  leave.     I  can  remain  only  to-day. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  ask  unanimous  consent  that  Mr.  Nickerson  if  he  desires  to  add  anything 
be  given  a  reasonable  length  of  time  to  file  an  additional  written  statement.  He  can 
probably  submit  that  before  he  leaves. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  May  I  say  one  more  word?  We  have  tried  to  bring  the  facts 
up  to  you  gentlemen,  and  if  you  are  not  satisfied  with  them  I  want  to  invite  you  to 
come  down  there,  this  committee,  and  see  for  yourselves.  If  you  do  not  feel  that  you 
are  able  to  act  on  the  evidence  we  have  produced  here,  I  want  to  ask  you  to  come 
down  on  the  ground,  and  I  will  say  that  we  will  pay  all  expenses  both  ways  to  get 
you  there  because  I  tell  you  we  have  got  to  have  help.  We  can  not  wait  until  the 
next  Congress:  we  want  you  to  do  something  right  now.  If  you  are  going  to  have  a 
recess,  all  right,  but  when  you  come  back  we  want  you  to  act  to  save  those  people  down 
there  from  destruction.  I  can  prove  to  you  that  every  word  I  have  said  is  absolutely 
true,  and  it  is  up  to  you  gentlemen  and  you  are  the  agencies  we  have  got  to  depend  on 
to  get  us  out  of  this  trouble. 

I  thank  you  for  the  time  you  have  given  me  and  I  wish  I  had  more,  but  I  want 
you  to  have  that  in  mind  now,  that  we  can  not  wait  till  next  August  to  get  something 
done  for  us.  If  you  will  only  start  something  it  will  give  us  a  credit,  it  will  put 
confidence  in  the  people,  it  will  put  confidence  in  the  banks.  Business  men  there 
have  come  to  me,  the  best  men  we  have  got  in  that  country,  and  they  have  said  to 
me,  ''For  God's  sake,  Nickerson,  get  something  done,  get  that  flood  taken  care  of, 
so  it  will  put  value  on  your  land  and  we  can  come  down  there  and  loan  money  to 
you."  We  can't  get  a  dollar  from  the  Federal  farm  loan  or  the  local  banks  or  the 
banks  in  Los  Angeles. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  I  think  the  committee  ought  to  recognize  the  emergency 
that  is  confronting  the  people  and  the  property  interests  there,  but  this  is  a  great 
question  and  of  course  the  committee  will  have  to  give  it  consideration  and  submit 
the  facts  to  the  House.  I  do  not  think  there  are  very  many  Members  of  the  House 
outside  of  this  committee  that  know  much  about  this. 

Mr.  RAKER.  It  would  be  a  wonderful  thing  if  this  committee  as  a  committee  could 
go  down  there  and  see  that  country,  see  the  actual  physical  conditions  as  they  exist. 

Mr.  XICKERSOX.  Arizona  is  in  Mr.  Hayden's  country,  and  the  Yuma  district  is  in 
nearly  as  bad  a  fix  as  we  are,  not  quite. "  They  had  2.000  acres  covered  up  last  year 
and  the  people  had  to  take  their  things  and  go  to  the  hills. 

If  you  people  are  not  satisfied  with  the  information  you  have  gotten,  gentlemen, 
you  ought  to  get  it,  because  we  have  gone  through  the  department  and  have  gotten 
up  to  you  now,  and  it  is  up  to  you  people  to  act.  I  feel  that  if  I  had  not  done  thig 
the  responsibility  would  have  been  on  us.  but  I  feel  now  that  it  is  on  you. 

Mr.  RAKER.  I'think  I  will  come  down  into  that  section  and  see  it  myself  this  fall. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  \Ye  will  be  glad  to  see  you,  but  we  would  like  to  see  the  whole 
committee.  We  can  prove  every  word  that  we  say,  gentlemen. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  We  appreciate  very  much  the  information  that  you  have  given 
us,  Mr.  Nickerson,  and  we  feel  that  you  are  very  well  advised  in  regard  to  conditions 
on  the  lower  Colorado  River. 

Mr.  NICKERSON.  I  ought  to  be:  I  have  been  in  that  country  for  a  good  many  years, 
and  the  people  must  think  that  I  know  something  about  it  or  they  would  kick  me  out.  I 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  was  unavoidably  detained  at  my  office  at  the  beginning  of  to-day's 
session  of  the  committee.  I  have  since  been  informed  that  some  telegrams  and  a 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLOEADO   RIVER  BASIN.  155 

letter  were  included  in  the  record.  Mr.  Nickerson  has  also  mentioned  the  interest 
of  Arizona  in  this  matter.  I  have  some  statements,  articles,  and  letters  from  a  number 
of  engineers  who  have  discussed  the  Colorado  River  problem  which  I  consider  worthy 
of  the  attention  of  this  committee.  I  therefore  ask  leave  to  have  the  same  printed 
as  a  part  of  these  hearings,  together  with  a  letter  from  the  Arizona  State  water  commis- 
sioner, extracts  from  which  I  have  heretofore  read. 

Mr.  SMITH  of  Idaho.  If  there  is  no  objection  they  may  be  inserted  in  the  record. 

Mr.  RAKER.  What  is  their  attitude  in  this  matter? 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Varying  attitudes,  but  principally  pointing  out  the  great  interest 
that  Arizona  has  in  the  control  of  the  Colorado  River. 

(The  matter  referred  to  is  as  follows:) 

PHOENIX,  ARIZ.,  May  (>,  1922. 
Hon.  CARL  HAYDEN, 

House  of  Representatives,  Washington,  D.  C. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  HAYDEN:  I  beg  to  acknowledge  receipt  of  your  letter  of  April  29, 
inclosing  copy  of  the  Swing  bill.  H.  R.  11449,  which  I  have  read  over  with  a  great 
deal  of  interest  and  some  misgiving  and  will  give  you  my  reflection  thereon. 

In  the  first  section,  beginning  with  line  8  to  the  end  of  the  section,  the  language  is 
objected  to  for  the  reason  that  it  takes  out  of  the  control  of  the  State  of  Arizona  one 
of  her  largest  undeveloped  resources,  and  one  to  which  we  have  long  looked  to  be  of 
very  great  benefit  to  our  State  when  developed.  It  would  appear  from  the  language 
that  all  persons,  municipal  corporations,  private  corporations,  or  States  would  be 
prevented  from  constructing  or  owning  any  dams  or  diversion  works  in  the  Colorado 
Riv'er  below  the  mouth  of  the  Green  River.  I  personally  object  to  this  presumed 
reservation  on  the  part  of  the  United  States  of  the  exclusive  right  to  construct,  etc., 
because,  as  I  deem  it.  the  United  States  has  no  authority  to  make  any  such  reserva- 
tion, nor  can  such  authority  be  granted  by  Congress,  and,  in  brief,  my  reasons  for  this 
statement  are  based  on  many  cases  decided  by  our  United  States  Supreme  Court,  a 
very  few  of  which  I  will  cite: 

In  Martin  r.  Waddell  (16  Pet.  367)  it  was  held  when  the  American  Revolution  was 
concluded,  the  people  of  each  State  became  themselves  sovereign,  and  in  that  char- 
acter held  the  absolute  right  to  all  their  navigable  waters  and  the  soils  under  them 
for  their  own  common  use,  subject  only  to  the  rights  since  surrendered  by  the  Consti- 
tution to  the  General  Government. 

In  Pollard  r.  Hagan  (3  How.  212)  it  was  held  that  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  did  not  by  reason  of  that  enactment  possess  any  more  power  over  the  navigable 
waters  of  Alabama  than  it  possessed  over  the  navigable  waters  of  other  States  under 
the  provisions  of  the  Constitution,  and  that  Alabama  had  as  much  power  over  thoee 
navigable  waters  as  the  original  States  possessed  over  the  navigable  waters  within 
their  respective  limits.  It  was  also  held  that  the  shores  of  navigable  waters  and  the 
soils  under  them  were  not  granted  by  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  but 
were  reserved  to  the  States,  respectively,  and  the  new  States  had  the  game  rights, 
sovereignty,  and  jurisdiction  over  the  subject  as  the  original  States. 

In  Hardin  v.  Jordan  (140  U.  S.  371),  the  court  said:  "This  right  of  the  States  to 
regulate  and  control  the  shores  of  tide  waters  and  the  land  under  them  is  the  same  as 
that  which  is  exercised  by  the  Crown  in  England.  In  this  country  the  same  rule  has 
been  extended  to  our  great  navigable  lakes,  which  are  treated  as  inland  seas;  and 
also,  in  some  of  the  States,  the  navigable  rivers,  as  the  Mississippi,  the  Missouri,  the 
Ohio,  and  in  Pennsylvania  to  all  the  permanent  rivers  of  the  State,  but  it  depends 
on  the  law  of  each  State  to  what  waters  and  to  what  extent  this  prerogatory  of  the  State 
over  the  lands  under  water  shall  be  exercised." 

In  the  same  case  Mr.  Justice  Brewer,  in  his  dissenting  opinion,  stated:  "That  the 
question  how  far  the  title  of  the  riparian  owner  extends  is  one  of  local  law.  For  a 
determination  of  that  question  the  siatutes  of  the  State  and  the  decisions  of  ite 
highest  court  furnish  the  best  and  the  final  authority." 

In  Kaukauna  Water  Power  Co.  v.  Green  Bay  &  Misissippi  Canal  Cos.  (142  U.  S. 
254)  Mr.  JustirejBrown,  in  delivering  the  opinion  of  the  court,  said:  "It  is  the  settled 
law  of  Wisconsin,  announced  in  repeated  decisions  of  ite  supreme  court,  that  the 
ownership  of  riparian  proprietors  extends  to  the  center  or  thread  of  the  stream,  subject, 
if  such  stream  be  navigable,  to  the  right  of  the  public  to  its  use  as  a  public  highway 
for  the  passage  of  its  vessels.  *  *  * 

"With  respect  to  such  rights  we  have  held  that  the  law  of  the  State,  as  closed  by  ita 
supreme  court,  is  controlling  as  a  rule  of  property." 

In  Shively  v.  Bowlby  (152  U.  S.  1)  it  was  held  that  upon  the  question  how  far  the 
title  of  the  owner  of  the  land  extends  bordering  upon  a  river  actually  navigable  both 
above  the  ebb  and  flow  of  the  tide,  there  is  a  diversity  in  the  laws  of  the  different 
States;  and  that  the  title  and  rights  or  riparian  or  littoral  proprietors  in  the  soil  below 


156  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

high-water  mark  are  governed  by  the  law?  «\  the  several  States,  subject  to  the  rights 
granted  to  the  United  States  by  the  Constitution. 

In  the  same  case  it  was  held:  "The  jurisdiction  of  the  State  over  this  question  of 
riparian  ownership  has  always  been,  from  the  foundation  of  the  Government,  recog- 
nized and  admitted  by  this  court." 

In  Weber  v.  the  Board  of  Harbor  Commissions  (Wall.  57,  U.  S.  Kept.  85 1.  Mr.  Justice 
Field,  in  delivering  the  opinion  of  the  court,  among  other  things,  said:  "Although  the 
title  to  the  soil  under  the  tidewaters  of  the  bay  was  acquired  by  the  United  States  by 
cession  from  Mexico,  equally  with  the  title  to  the  upland,  they  held  it  only  in  trust 
for  the  future  State.  Upon  the  admission  of  California  into  the  Union  upon  equal 
footing  with  the  original  States,  absolute  property  in  and  dominion  and  sovereignty 
over  all  soils  under  the  tidewaters  within  her  limits  passed  to  the  State,  with  the  con- 
sequent right  to  dispose  of  the  title  to  any  part  of  said  soils  in  such  manner  as  she  might 
deem  proper,  subject  only  to  the  paramount  right  of  navigation  of  the  waters  so  far  as 
such  navigation  might  be  required  by  the  necessities  of  commerce  with  foreign  nations 
or  among  the  several  States,  the  regulation  of  which  is  vested  in  the  General  Govern- 
ment." 

In  Port  of  Seattle  v.  Oregon  &  Washington  Railroad  Co.  and  J.  F.  Duthie  cV  <',,.. 
reported  in  Xo.  8,  advance  sheets.  United  States  Supreme  Court,  page  265,  March  1. 
1921.  Mr.  Justice  Brandeis.  in  delivering  the  opinion  of  the  court,  among  other  things, 
said,  first:  "The  right  of  the  United  States  in  the  navigable  waters  within  the  several 
States  is  limited  to  the  control  thereof  for  purposes  of  navigation.  *  * 

"The  extent  of  the  State's  ownership  of  the  land  is  more  accurately  defined  by  the 
decision  of  the  highest  court  as  being  tne  land  below  high -water  mark  or  the  meander 
line,  whichever  of  these  lines  is  the  lower.  The  character  of  the  State's  ownership 
in  the  land  and  in  the  waters  is  the  full  proprietary  right.  The  State,  being  the 
absolute  owner  of  the  tidelands  and  the  waters  over  them,  is  free  in  conveying  tide- 
lands  either  to  grant  with  them  rights  in  the  adjoining  water  area  or  to  completely 
withhold  all  such  rights." 

From  these  citations  and  many  others  that  might  be  made,  I  conceive  the  notion 
that  the  United  States  can  not  reserve  to  itself  the  exclusive  control  of  the  Colorado 
River  from  the  mouth  of  the  Green  to  the  Gulf  of  California,  for  I  hold  that  the  State 
of  Arizona  owns  the  bed  of  the  stream  from  high-water  mark  to  high-water  mark  and 
the  waters  flowing  in  the  stream  within  the  confines  of  the  State  or  Arizona:  that 
the  right  of  the  State  of  Arizona  is  a  proprietary  right ;  that  under  the  laws  of  the  State 
of  Arizona,  even  the  Government  of  the  United  States  must  make  application  to  the 
State  for  a  permit  the  same  as  any  individual,  company,  or  corporation. 

The  bill  appears  to  view  the  whole  situation  from  a  California  standpoint  and  to 
entirely  absorb  Arizona  and  its  rights  in  the  river. 

Section  2  of  the  bill  authorizes  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam.  and 
also  the  construction  of  the  proposed  all-American  canal,  which  is  a  purely  California 
project.  To  neither  of  these  projects  do  we.  so  far  as  I  am  personally  concerned,  have 
any  objection  so  long  as  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  is  constructed  in  the  place  where 
and  in  the  manner  which  wrould  best  serve  the  interests  of  the  State  of  Arizona,  and 
that  the  rights  of  Arizona  are  maintained  in  such  development. 

Section  3  gives  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  the  right  to  dispose  of  the  utilization 
of  the  water  for  the  generation  of  electric  power,  and  my  own  opinion  is  that  it  should 
include  the  statement  that  the  State  of  Arizona  should  have  a  preferred  right  to  the 
extent  of  the  needs  of  the  State. 

Section  4  of  the  bill  should  also  include  the  statement  that  the  State  of  Arizona 
should  have  a  preferred  right  to  take  over  the  property  wholly  within  the  State  upon 
the  payment  as  suggested  in  the  section. 

Section  5  of  the  bill  is  a  grant  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  to  allow  the  purchase 
of  property  in  the  State  of  Arizona  by  such  political  subdivisions  that  shall  have  heen 
allocated  fights  for  the  generation  of  power.  This,  of  course,  has  particular  reference 
to  the  City  of  Los  Angeles.  Imperial  Valley,  other  cities  in  Southern  California  and 
the  State  of  California,  and  it  does  not  appear  to  me  that  either  the  State  of  California 
or  any  political  subdivision  of  the  State  of  California  should  be  permitted  to  purchase 
and  own  property  that  might  be  determined  to  be  real  property,  of  the  character 
referred  to.  in  the  State  of  Arizona  in  perpetuity,  and.  therefore.  I  object  to  section  5 
in  its  present  form. 

I  realize  that  if  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  were  constructed  at  the  present  time,  it 
would  be  necessary  to  allow  a  portion  at  least  of  the  power  to  go  to  California  points, 
as  well  as  Nevada'and  Utah,  because  there  would  not  be  a  market  for  all  the  power 
that  could  be  produced  there  within  the  State  of  Arizona,  and  I  see  no  objection  in 
that,  but  to  allow  IMS  Angeles,  for  instance,  to  come  into  the  State  of  Arizona  and 
purchase  the  power  plant  and  lands  necessary  in  its  operation,  or  the  dam  and  the 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN".  157 

plant,  to  hold  in  perpetuity.  I  think  is  goins  too  far.  There  should  be  a  time  limit  on 
any  possessory  right  owned  by  outside  political  subdivisions,  at  the  termination  of 
which  either  the  Government  of  the  United  States  or  the  State  of  Arizona  should  have 
the  right  to  take  over  the  property  and  rights  attached  thereto. 

I  see  no  objection  to  section  (i  and  the  sections  following,  except  that  the  bill  is 
practically  for  the  development  of  California  and  does  not  include  any  develonment 
in  the  State  of  Arizona,  except  the  development  of  power  generally. 

On  the  whole.  I  think  the  bill  should  be  materially  amended,  for  in  some  particulars 
it  conflicts  with  the  authority  delegated  to  the  Colorado  River  Commission,  and  until 
the  Colorado  River  Commission  compact  has  been  made  and  ratified  we  do  not  know 
all  the  provisions  it  wil\  contain,  but  whatever  provisions  it  shall  contain,  must  be 
deemed  the  law  of  the  basin;  all  other  laws  of  the  .States  involved  pertaining  to  the 
same  subject  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding. 
Very  truly  yours. 

•     W.  S.  XORVIEL, 
State  Water  Commissioner. 


THE  COLORADO  RIVER  AND  ARIZONA'S  INTEREST  IN  ITS  DEVELOPMENT. 
[By  G.  E.  P.  Smith,  Irrigation  Engineer,  Univerity  of  Arizona.] 

It  is  nearly  400  years  since  Spanish  explorers  discovered  the  canyons  of  the  Colorado 
River.  During  these  centuries  mankind  has  coped  with  many  problems  and  has 
surmounted  great  obstacles.  But  the  600-mile  stretch  of  canyon  of  the  Colorado  of 
the  West  is  still  under  nature's  control.  No  stone  has  been  turned  to  impede  the  flow 
of  water;  no  revolving  wheel  converts  the  power  of  the  flood  to  useful  purposes. 

The  development  of  the  great  river  is  a  stupendous  problem.  Not  alone  is  the  lay- 
man staggered  by  the  difficulties  involved  and  by  the  immensity  of  the  stakes,  but 
the  engineer  is  challenged  and  is  struggling  to  conceive  of  the  gigantic  works  that  are 
required — dams  of  twice  the  height  of  the  highest  dam  yet  attempted,  reservoirs  12  to 
20  times  as  large  as  the  largest  artificial  reservoir  in  the  world,  and  power  generation 
on  a  prodigious  scale. 

GEOGRAPHY    AND    IRRIGABLE    LANDS. 

Before  presenting  the  problems  of  the  Colorado  River  it  may  be  helpful  to  review 
the  geography  oi  the  region  and  to  present  a  digest  of  the  character  and  extent  of  the 
water  supply. 

The  drainage  basin  of  the  Colorado  is  shown  in  figure  1.  It  includes  parts  of  seven 
States — the  southwestern  part  of  Wyoming,  the  western  half  of  Colorado,  the  eastern 
half  of  Utah,  a  strip  along  the  west  side  of  New  Mexico,  all  of  Arizona  except  the  south- 
east corner,  the  southeast  part  of  Nevada,  and  the  southeast  edge  of  California — in  all, 
251,000  square  miles.  The  watershed  on  the  east  side  of  the  basin  is  the  Continental 
Divide,  from  the  Mexican  boundary  line  almost  to  Yellowstone  Park.  All  of  the 
northern  half  of  the  basin,  and  part  of  the  southern  half,  consists  of  high,  mountainous 
country,  on  which  there  is  a  heavy  annual  precipitation. 

Until  a  year  ago  that  part  of  the  stream  system  draining  western  Colorado  was 
called  the  Grand  River.  In  the  southeastern  part  of  Utah  that  stream  unites  with  the 
Green  River,  the  headwaters  of  which  are  in  Wyoming.  Below  the  junction  of  the 
Grand  and  the  Green  the  stream  was  called  the  Colorado.  A  year  ago,  by  congressional 
action,  the  name  of  the  Grand  was  changed  to  Colorado;  presumably  geography  and, 
ultimately,  public  usage  will  adopt  the  new  name  for  the  upper  river.  The  principal 
tributaries  below  the  junction  of  the  Green  and  the  Grand  are  the  San  Juan,  flowing 
westerly  from  the  northwest  corner  of  New  Mexico;  the  Little  Colorado,  which  drains 
the  north  side  of  the  Mogollon  Rim  in  Arizona;  and  the  Gila,  which  drains  the  central 
and  southern  parts  of  Arizona. 

In  the  upper  basin,  that  is.  the  basin  above  the  Grand  Canyon,  there  is  a  large  area 
of  land  under  cultivation,  about  1,500,000  acres,  mostly  on  the  headwaters  and 
tributaries  where  diversions  from  the  streams  are  easily  accomplished.  The  irrigation 
of  the  land,  however,  requires  comparatively  little  water,  on  account  of  the  high 
altitude,  cold  climate  and  short  growing  season,  and  part  of  the  water  applied  returns 
underground  to  the  stream.  An  even  greater  area,  now  idle,  is  susceptible  of  irrigation, 
part  of  it,  however,  at  such  high  cost  as  to  make  the  projects  of  doubtful  feasibility. 
Studies  made  by  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service  indicate  that  the  irrigated 
area  in  the  upper  basin  will  be  increased  to  3.000,000  acres. 

In  the  lower  basin,  below  the  Grand  Canyon,  the  areas  irrigated  in  1920  included 
39,000  acres  between  Needles  and  Yuma,  mostly  on  the  California  side;  54,000  acres 


158  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

in  the  Yuma  project;  415.000  acres  in  the  Imperial  Valley;  and  190.000  acres  south  of 
the  international  boundary  line — a  total  of  698.000  acres. "  This  total  is  almost  exactly 
double  the  acreage  irrigated  in  1913.  showing  the  rapid  rate  of  increase  in  the  use  of 
water  in  the  lower  basin.  The  possible  extension  of  irrigation  in  the  lower  basin  has 
not  been  determined  fully,  but  conservative  estimates  indicate  that  the  following 
additional  areas  can  be  brought  under  irrigation:  260.000  acres  between  Needles  and 
Yuma,  150,000  acres  of  which  is  on  the  Arizona  side;  76,000  acres  in  the  Yuma  project; 
400,000  acres  in  the  Imperial  and  Coachella  Valleys;  and  630.000  acres  in  Mexico. 

WATER    SUPPLY. 

Engineers  have  methods,  of  comparative  accuracy,  for  measuring  the  quantity  of 
water  flowing  in  rivers.  The  record  of  the  flow,  day  by  day,  month  by  month,  shows 
the  extent  of  the  water  supply  and  its  fluctuations,  and  furnishes  a  basis  for  the  design 
of  engineering  works.  On  the  Colorado  River  and  its  tributaries,  many  gauging 
stations,  at  carefully  chosen  locations,  have  been  kept  for  varying  periods  of  time, 
some  of  the  records  extending  over  25  years. 

The  records  of  stream  flow  at  Yuma  have  been  kept  since  January,  1902.  The 
gaging  station  is  below  the  mouth  of  the  Gila  River  and  below  the  Yuma  diversion 
dam,  but  above  the  head  gates  of  the  Imperial  Canal.  The  average  annual  flow  at 
the  gaging  station  for  the  period  1902-1920  was  17.300,000  acre-feet.  Had  the  present 
irrigated  area  been  under  irrigation  throughout  the  period  of  the  record,  the  average 
annual  flow  would  have  been  about  16,000.000  acre-feet.  The  average  flow  at  Boulder 
Canyon  is  practically  the  same  amount,  since  diversions  and  losses  between  Boulder 
Canyon  and  Yuma  are  balanced  by  the  inflow  of  tributaries. 

Most  of  the  water  comes  from  the  upper  basin.  At  the  junction  of  the  Grand  and 
the  Green,  the  average  annual  discharge  of  the  Grand  is  6,900,000  acre-feet,  and  of  the 
Green  5,500,000  acre-feet.  The  Green  and  Grand  and  San  Juan  Rivers  together, 
though  draining  less  than  two-fifths  of  the  area  of  the  Colorado  Basin,  furnish  86  per 
cent  of  the  total  water  supply. 

By  far  the  greater  part  of  the  precipitation  in  Colorado  and  Wyoming  is  in  the  form 
of  snow.  During  the  winter  the  snow  accumulates  to  great  depths.  The  melting  of 
the  snow  during  the  spring  months  produces  a  long  period  of  high  water,  the  annual 
flood,  which  lasts  from  two  to  three  months  and  reaches  its  highest  point  at  Yuma 
usually  in  June.  During  the  June  flood  of  1909,  the  flow  at  Yuma  reached  150,000 
cubic  feet  per  second.  On  June  27,  1921,  all  previous  June  records  were  broken  by  a 
flow  of  186,000  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  low-water  season  begins  in  August  and 
lasts  from  three  to  seven  months.  The  minimum  flow  at  Yuma  has  been  below  4,000 
cubic  feet  per  second  during  several  low-water  seasons. 

The  Gila  River  drains  an  area  of  57,000  square  miles.  While  the  average  annual 
discharge  of  the  river  is  not  great  it  is  very  variable.  In  1916  the  discharge  of  the 
river  at  its  mouth  was  4,500,000  acre-feet:  in  some  other  years  the  total  has  been  less 
than  100,000  acre-feet.  Short-lived,  "flashy"  floods,  greater  than  the  highest  peak 
floods  in  the  Colorado,  occur  at  times.  The  flow  on  January  16,  1916,  reached  220,000 
cubic  feet  per  second.  It  is  fortunate  that  the  Gila  floods  do  not  come  at  the  same 
time  as  the  Colorado  floods,  in  May  or  June.  Should  they  coincide,  the  menace  to  the 
Yuma  and  Imperial  valleys  would  be  intensified;  the  levees  would  be  overwhelmed. 

RESERVOIR    SITES. 

There  are  scores,  hundreds,  of  storage  sites  in  the  middle  and  upper  parts  of  the 
Colorado  Basin.  Many  of  them  have  been  surveyed,  and  at  several  of  the  sites  the 
depth  to  bedrock  has  been  ascertained  by  diamond  drilling.  The  Strawberry  Valley 
site  in  Utah  and  the  Roosevelt  site  in  Arizona  and  some  small  sites  have  been  occu- 
pied already.  For  the  complete  regulation  and  utili/ation  of  the  river,  there  are 
adequate  natural  opportunities:  the  real  problem  is  as  to  which  is  the  best.  A  few 
of  the  largest  and  most  promising  sites,  those  which  are  of  greatest  public  interest,, 
will  be  discussed. 

The  Dewey  Reservoir  site  is  situated  on  the  Grand  River  just  west  of  the  Utah- 
Colorado  line.  Although  one  of  the  last  to  be  discovered,  it  is  one  of  the  best.  It  is 
the  only  site  for  a  large  reservoir  on  the  Grand  River  except  the  Kremmling,  and 
that  site  is  occupied  by  a  railroad.  The  bedrock  at  the  Dewey  site  is  only  44  feet 
below  the  river  bed,  and  the  capacity  with  a  dam  only  215  feet  high  from  river  bed 
to  spillway  is  2,300,000  acre-feet. 

The  Flaming  Gorge  site  is  on  the  Green  River  in  Utah  just  south  of  the  Wyoming 
line.  The  greatest  depth  to  bedrock  is  73  feet,  and  a  215-foot  dam  will  impound 
3,120,000  acre-feet.  The  width  of  the  canyon  is  200  feet.  The  Flaming  Gorge  and 
the  Dewey  sites  control  the  most  important  headwaters  of  the  Colorado.  Both  are 
excellent  projects  and  should  be  under  construction  to-day. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX.  159 

Another  excellent  site  is  on  the  Yampa  tributary,  near  Juniper  Mountain.  The 
drainage  area  is  small,  but  the  stream  flow  approximates  1.000,000  acre-feet  of  water 
per  year.  A  200-foot  clam  would  provide  a  capacity  of  1,500,000  acre-feet.  The 
depth  to  bedrock  is  21  feet. 

The  Ouray  Reservoir  site  is  on  the  Green  River  a  hundred  miles  below  the  Flaming 
_re  site.  This  site  is  remarkable  in  that  a  dam  only  210  feet  high  would  impound 
16,000,000  acre-feet  of  water.  The  greatest  depth  to  bedrock,  a  factor  of  great  influ- 
ence on  the  cost  of  a  dam,  is  121  feet,  and  the  canyon  is  not  narrow.  This  site  should 
be  held  available  by  the  Federal  Government  until  it  is  absolutely  certain  that  the 
site  is  not  needed  in  the  general  scheme  for  development  of  the  river.  If  the  site  is 
restored  to  entry,  it  will  be  seized  at  once  by  the  Denver  &  Salt  Lake  Railroad.  The 
railway  can  be  built  around  the  reservoir  site. 

A  reservoir  at  the  junction  of  the  Green  and  the  Grand  has  been  under  consideration 
for  many  years.  It  would  regulate  partially  both  streams.  A  dam  250  feet  high 
would  impound  7,450,000  acre-feet.  Borings  were  made  to  120  feet  without  encoun- 
tering bedrock.  It  is  unfortunate  that  the  borings  were  not  carried  somewhat  deeper. 

An  apparently  excellent  reservoir  site  exists  on  the  San  Juan  near  Bluff,  Utah, 
but  its  feasibility  has  not  been  established  by  test  holes  to  find  bedrock.  A  dam  264 
feet  high  would  create  a  reservoir  of  2,600,000  acre-feet  capacity.  The  accumulation 
of  silt  in  this  reservoir  would  be  very  rapid. 

The  Glen  Canyon,  or  Lees  Ferry,  site  outclasses  all  other  proposed  sites  in  its  gigantic 
possibilities.  The  maximum  development  contemplates  a  dam  700  feet  high,  450 
feet  long  at  the  level  of  the  river,  and  1,400  feet  long  on  top.  The  proposed  slopes 
are  One  to  six  downstream  and  one  to  four  upstream,  making  the  length  of  base  up 
and  downstream  over  a  mile.  The  capacity  of  the  reservoir  would  be  over  50,000,000 
acre-feet,  and  86  per  cent  of  the  entire  water  supply  of  the  Colorado  Basin  would  be 
regulated  completely.  Over  a  million  continuous  horsepower  could  be  developed 
without  sacrifice  of  irrigation  interests.  Complete  surveys  of  the  reservoir  site  have 
been  made  during  the  last  few  months.  No  test  borings  have  been  made,  and  it  is 
stated  that  the  depth  to  bedrock  is  not  a  crucial  matter  on  account  of  the  radial  char- 
acter of  the  dam  contemplated.  Test  borings  should  be  made  at  once. 

Excellent  dam  sites  exist  in  Cataract  Canyon  and  Marble  Canyon.  The  project 
for  Marble  Canyon  provides  for  a  power  development  of  1,300,000  horsepower,  but 
the  storage  possibilities  are  small.  This  will  be  the  last  of  the  major  projects  because 
of  its  magnitude  and  high  cost. 

On  the  Little  Colorado  River  there  is  a  dam  site  at  Tolchaco,  where  the  entire  flood 
flow  of  that  stream  can  be  controlled  by  a  dam  50  feet  high. 

The  site  at  the  mouth  of  Diamond  Creek  is  of  particular  interest  to  Arizona,  on 
account  of  its  favorable  location  and  because  it  is  controlled  by  Arizona  people.  The 
site  is  only  16  miles  from  Peach  Springs,  a  station  on  the  Santa  Fe  Railroad.  It  is  a 
power  project  only,  there  being  practically  no  storage.  Present  plans,  subject  to 
modification,  call  for  a  dam  284  feet  high,  324  feet  above  bedrock,  to  the  spillway  crest, 
and  the  top  of  the  structure  would  be  25  feet  higher.  About  110.000  horsepower  could 
be  developed  with  the  unregulated  flow  of  the  river,  but  in  case  the  flow  is  equalized 
by  a  project  with  storage  farther  up  the  river  the  ultimate  power  development  may 
reach  (iOO.OOO  horsepower.  The  canyon  at  this  site  is  only  220  feet  wide  at  the  water 
level,  and  the  length  of  the  dam  at  the  top  will  be  600  feet,  about  the  same  as  the 
Roosevelt  Dam.  The  walls  and  foundation  are  of  granite.  The  main  electric  trans- 
mission line  would  extend  through,  or  near,  Prescott,  Phoenix,  Mesa,  Florence,  and 
Tucson  to  Douglas,  with  important  laterals  to  Jerome,  Ray,  Globe,  Clifton,  Ajo,  and 
Yurna. 

The  Boulder  Canyon  site  is  in  a  similar  narrow  canyon  in  granite  rock.  The  canyon 
walls  are  300  feet  apart.  Here  it  is  proposed  to  build  a  solid  concrete  masonry  dam  600 
feet  high,  735  feet  above  bedrock,  to  elevation  1,300  feet  above  sea  level.  The  capacity 
of  the  reservoir  is  31,600,000  acre-feet,  and  the  estimated  cost  of  the  dam  alone  is 
$55,000,000.  The  great  depth  to  bedrock  is  the  main  disadvantage  of  this  site.  While 
the  problems  of  carrying  the  foundation  to  so  great  a  depth  and  of  passing  the  annual 
and  occasional  floods  of  the  river  during  the  construction  period  strike  terror  to  the 
heart  of  the  engineer,  the  task  can  be  accomplished  if  adequate  funds  are  provided. 
The  power  development  will  be  700,000  continuous  horsepower  as  long  as  the  irrigated 
area  in  the  lower  basin  does  not  exceed  1,500,000  acres,  and  will  decrease  to  600,000 
horsepower  as  the  acreage  increases  to  2,000,000  acres. 

The  last  annual  report  of  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service  states  that  an  in- 
spection of  the  lower  river  was  made  by  boat  by  Homer  Hamlin.  a  noted  engineer,  in 
April,  1920,  and  that  he  reports  that  there  is  no  9-ood  d°m  site  for  a  storage  reservoir 
between  Boulder  Canvon  and  Yuma. 


160  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

THE  THREE  GREAT  PROBLEMS. 

Three  objects  are  sought  in  the  development  of  the  Colorado  River.  They  are:  (1) 
Storage  for  flood  protection;  (2)  storage  to  provide  more  water  for  the  latter  half  of  the 
irrigation  season  and  for  dry  years;  and  (3)  hydroelectric  power. 

The  flood  protection  is  the  main  incentive  which  is  spurring  many  agencies  to  action. 
The  people  of  the  Imperial  Valley,  for  Hi  years,  have  been  lighting  a  defensive  battle 
against  the  Colorado,  sometimes  gaining,  sometimes  losing,  but  in  the  main  losing. 
They  can  not  hold  out  for  many  more  years.  At  least  once  every  year,  in  June,  and 
sometimes  at  other  seasons,  the  river  threatens  to  change  its  course  frcm  the  Gulf  of 
California  to  the  Imperial  Valley,  as  it  did  in  1905.  The  only  protection  at  present  is 
the  system  of  levees,  called  respectively  the  first,  second,  and  third  lines  of  defense. 
Frequently  the  floods  breakthrough  the  first  and  second  lines  and  reach  the  third  line. 
Each  year  the  river,  through  silt  deposition,  builds  up  that  part  of  the  alluvial  fan  in 
front  of  the  levees,  in  some  years  as  much  as  4  feet,  and  each  year  the  levees  must  be 
raised  an  equal  amount.  Over  one-quarter  of  a  million  dollars  is  expended  each  year 
by  the  farmers  of  the  Imperial  Valley  in  this  work.  The  limit  will  be  reached  soon. 
Levees  40  or  50  feet  high  can  not  be  maintained. 

The  Yuma  Valley  also  is  protected  by  levees,  but  the  danger  there  does  not  increase. 
Arizona  hopes  to  develop  another  great  irrigated  valley  farther  upstream  at  Parker, 
but  much  of  the  Parker  Valley  is  now  subject  to  overflow  and  must  be  protected  by  an 
expensive  system  of  levees  unless  adequate  regulation  of  the  flood  waters  is  provided 
by  storage  reservoirs.  Regulation  of  the  Green  and  the  Grand  will  solve  the  problem 
in  large  measure,  but  tributaries  below  the  junction  must  be  given  consideration.  On 
one  occasion  a  flood  of  150,000  second-feet  measured  at  Bluff,  Utah,  was  contributed  by 
the  San  Juan,  and  the  Gila  River  floods  likewise  are  a  menace  with  which  to  reckon. 

As  for  storage  to  equalize  the  supply  for  irrigation,  the  situation  is  more  critical  than 
is  commonly  known.  Despite  the  great  excess  of  water  which  is  wasted  to  the  ocean 
each  year,  there  is  an  actual  shortage  during  the  latter  part  of  the  irrigation  season  in 
dry  years.  In  1915  the  entire  flow  of  the  river  was  diverted  into  the  Imperial  Canal  at 
the  end  of  August,  and  yet  there  was  not  enough  water  to  meet  the  demand.  Since 
that  time  the  acreage  irrigated  from  the  river  has  increased  300,000  acres.  If  the 
natural  flow  next  September  is  as  low  as  it  was  in  1915,  there  will  be  300,000  acres  of 
crops  without  any  water  to  bring  them  to  maturity,  and  the  financial  loss  and  human 
suffering  will  be  appalling.  Again,  it  is  the  Imperial  Valley  that  is  in  danger,  for 
other  projects  have  the  advantage  of  location  upstream.  No  further  expansion  of 
irrigation  use  should  be  allowed  until  storage  is  provided ;  it  should  be  admitted  that 
the  natural  flow  is  entirely  appropriated.  It  does  not  seem  practicable,  however,  to 
prevent  continued  appropriation  and  use  of  water  in  Utah  and  Colorado. 

But  how  can  storage  be  financed?  The  Imperial  Valley  is  burdened  already  with 
a  heavy  bonded  indebtedness  and  is  facing  the  further  problem  of  the  all-American 
canal,  which  is  expected  to  cost  $30,000,000.  The  farmers  can  not  finance  the 
river  regulation  which  they  require  and  must  have. 

Now  enters  the  third  element  of  the  great  project — power.  The  power  possibilities 
are  so  great,  and  power  is  so  valuable,  that  it  is  estimated  the  sale  of  power  will  pay 
for  the  entire  project.  A  few  months  ago  the  proposal  was  to  charge  5  per  cent  of  the 
cost  of  the  storage  dam  to  irrigation,  10  per  cent  to  flood  protection,  and  85  per  cent 
to  power.  Now  it  is  proposed  to  charge  the  entire  cost  to  the  power  privileges.  About 
4,000,000  horsepower  can  be  developed  in  Arizona  at  the  four  sites  mentioned  above. 

Is  there  a  market  for  so  much  power?  Arizona  can  take  about  100,000  horsepower 
to  replace  present  steam  plants.  Cheap  power  will  permit  of  increased  pump  irriga- 
tion, the  mining  of  lower  grade  ores,  and  the  electrification  of  our  railways.  We 
shall  have  factories  where  our  own  raw  materials  can  be  fabricated,  cotton  mills, 
copper  and  brass  foundries;  and  the  electrolytic  refining  of  Arizona  copper  can  be 
done  in  our  own  State.  All  city  and  house  lighting  will  be  done  with  hydroelectric 
power,  and  any  excess  can  be  used  for  making  nitrate  fertilizers. 

But  other  States,  especially  California,  will  compete  for  the  power.  A  great  amount 
can  be  marketed  in  southern  California  now.  It  is  estimated  that  in  15  years  all 
possible  hydroelectric  development  in  that  State  will  have  been  accomplished,  and 
California  interests  are  looking  much  farther  ahead  than  that. 

Nearly  all  of  the  power  requirements  of  the  mining  industry  in  Arizona  are  now 
supplied  from  petroleum  fuel  oil.  The  best  opinions  regarding  the  future  supply  of 
fuel  oil  point  to  a  diminution  of  the  supply  and  rapidly  rising  prices.  It  is  essential 
that  hydroelectric  power  be  developed  to  replace  the  failing  oil  supply. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLOEADO   RIVER  BASIN.  161 

PROPOSAL    OF   THE    UNITED    STATES    RECLAMATION"    SERVICE. 

Engineers  of  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service  have  been  studying  the  problem 
of  the  Colorado  for  eight  years,  and  have  decided  quite  definitely  on  what  they  believe 
should  be  the  first  project.  The  service  has  recommended  to  Congress  that  it  should 
be  a  project  of  the  Federal  Government,  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  stated  pub- 
licly at  the  Riverside  and  San  Diego  conventions  in  December,  1921,  that,  because 
of  the  international  and  interstate  character  of  the  river,  the  Federal  Government  is 
the  only  competent  agency  to  construct  the  great  dam  that  must  be  built,  and  to 
control  and  operate  its  gates.  He  is  right,  and  Arizona  should  back  to  the  the  limit 
Federal  ownership  and  operation  of  the  main  river-control  project. 

The  Reclamation  Service  recommends  that  the  dam  be  located  in  Boulder  Canyon , 
on  the  boundary  line  between  Arizona  and  Nevada.  On  account  of  the  peculiar 
situation,  the  west  end  of  the  dam  would  be  re,st  on  the  Arizona  side.  A  transmission 
line  from  that  point  to  Phoenix  would  be  about  250  miles  long,  and  a  line  to  Los 
Angeles  277  miles  in  length.  The  proposed  600-foot  dam  provides  for  storage  for 
irrigation  and  for  storage  of  silt  for  60  years,  and  for  5,000,000  acre-feet  capacity  at 
the  top  to  be  used  only  for  detention  of  high-flood  crests,  such  as  those  of  1907,  1909, 
1914,  and  1920. 

Last  July,  when  Congress  was  committed  to  retrenchment,  and  it  seemed  impossible 
to  interest  the  East  in  this  most  necessary  undertaking,  plans  were  made  to  contract 
the  power  privileges  in  advance  to  municipalities  and  States  or  to  other  purchasers, 
and  the  purchasers  were  to  obtain  the  necessary  funds  through  sale  of  bond  issues. 
The, city  of  Los  Angeles  was  ready  to  take  all  or  as  much  of  the  power  as  would  be 
allowed  to  that  city.  Now,  it  is  believed  that  there  is  a  good  fighting  chance  to  obtain 
the  money  through  Federal  appropriation,  with  ultimate  return  of  the  cost  to  the 
Government  by  the  sale  of  power. 

ALTERNATIVE    PROPOSALS. 

Although  crystallization  of  sentiment  in  favor  of  Boulder  Canyon  project  has  made 
considerable  headway,  still  some  widely  divergent  views  are  being  expressed,  and  it 
may  not  be  impertinent  to  discuss  alternative  proposals.  It  is  contended  that  for 
many  reasons  the  river  development  should  begin  farther  upstream.  That  the  Boulder 
Canyon  site  is  the  one  nearest  to  the  best  market  for  power  is  a  sound  argument.  Of 
the  other  arguments  advanced  for  that  site,  some  are  not  valid,  and  fhe  others  may  be 
met  by  the  statement  that  extensive  storage  in  the  upper  basin  can  be  followed  advan- 
tageously, and  will  be,  by  projects  providing  additional  storage  on  the  lower  river. 
If  the  flood  hazard  is  removed  or  is  greatly  reduced  by  means  of  extensive  storage  in 
Utah,  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  can  be  built  at  much  less  cost  and  in  fewer  years. 
Further,  if  the  river  regulation  is  effected  in  the  upper  basin,  the  power  sites  from 
Glen  Canyon  to  Boulder  Canyon,  inclusive,  become  much  more  valuable,  since  the 
water  supply  is  equalized  and  because  less  reserve  space  is  required  for  detention 
purposes.  The  upper  locations  will  be  developed  eventually;  why  not  now? 

From  that  standpoint  the  Dewey  site  on  the  Grand  River  and  the  Flaming  Gorge 
site  on  the  Green  offer  the  best  solution.  Hoth  dams  could  be  built  at  once,  and  the 
total  cost  would  be  only  about  $25.000,000.  The  Juniper  Mountain  Reservoir  would 
cost  $4,000.000.  These  sites  are  above  the  great  silt-gathering  area  of  the  drainage 
basin.  The  Flaming  Gorge  and  Dewey  Reservoirs  would  provide  ample  late-summer 
water  supply  for  the  lower  basin  for  many  years  to  come.  The  Flaming  Gorge  Reser- 
voir would  serve  to  reduce  the  spring  floods  on  the  Green  River  one-third,  and  the 
Dewey  Reservoir  would  take  the  peak  off  from  the  spring  floods  of  the  Grand.  The 
Dewey  Reservoir  would  be  operated  so  as  to  be  entirely  empty  at  the  beginning  of  the 
flood  period.  Both  dams  could  be  completed  in  five  years.  It  is  premised,  however, 
that  the  construction  of  these  dams  would  be  followed  by  that  of  one  or  more  others 
farther  downstream — possibly  one  on  the  San  Juan  or  at  Lees  Ferry,  and  either  the 
Diamond  Creek  Dam  or  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  or  both.  The  dams  on  the  headwaters 
should  be  built  under  the  same  theory  of  government  as  were  the  33  dams  on  the 
Ohio  River,  that  is.  to  secure  river  regulation  and  control,  to  make  the  stream  man- 
ageable and  utilizable.  Navigation  is  no  more  vital  to  the  economic  and  social  welfare 
of  the  group  of  six  States  bordering  the  Ohio  than  is  the  taming  and  harnessing  of  the 
Colorado  to  the  welfare  of  the  seven  States  along  its  course.  In  due  time  the  Govern- 
ment might  be  reimbursed  for  the  investment,  for,  after  the  construction  of  large 
storage  reservoirs  in  Arizona,  the  Utah  reservoirs  would  be  of  great  value  for  power 
production. 

The  Diamond  Creek  project  is  capable  of  comparatively  rapid  construction,  and  is 
quite  likely  to  go  ahead  of  the  Boulder  Dam  in  point  of  time.  It  would  be  a  strictly 


162  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

Arizona  enterprise,  and  free  from  the  entangling  jurisdictions  that  are  inevitable  in 
the  larger  projects.  It  does  not  in  any  way  lessen  the  necessity  for  the  Boulder  Dam 
or  some  other  dam  which  can  provide  storage  and  flood  control. 

Another  proposal  is  to  make  Lees  Fern-  Reservoir  the  first  major  undertaking.  On 
account  of  the  type  of  dam  planned,  the  extent  of  flooding  in  the  river  during  con- 
struction would  be  immaterial.  This  reservoir  as  planned  would  store  30  per  cent 
more  water  than  the  Boulder  Canyon  Reservoir,  the  production  of  power  would  be 
much  greater,  and  the  cost  would  be  less.  However,  on  account  of  the  radical  design 
and  proposed  methods  of  construction,  the  project  should  be  submitted  to  the  best 
engineering  talent  in  the  world  before  it  can  be  right  or  wise  to  adopt  it. 

WATER    RIGHTS. 

The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  has  decided  that  in  the  case  of  interstate- 
streams  in  the  arid  region,  neither  the  riparian  theory  of  water  rights  nor  the  priority 
of  appropriation  theory  can  obtain,  but  that  each  State  is  entitled  to  benefit  from  the 
river — to  substantial  benefits.  Presumably,  the  distribution  of  benefits  must  be 
made  by  the  Federal  court.  But  in  the  cage  of  the  Colorado  River,  where  there  is 
water  enough  for  all.  there  seems  to  be  no  necessity  for  any  litigation. 

The  States  of  the  upper  basin  seem  to  fear  that  the  construction  of  large  reservoirs 
will  serve  automatically  to  appropriate  the  waters  of  the  river  for  use  in  the  lower 
basin,  and  that  additional  development  of  irrigation  in  the  upper  States  will  be  pre- 
vented. Oft -repeated  assertions  of  the  United  States  Geological  Survey  and  the 
United  States  Reclamation  Service  that  the  water  supply  is  ample  and  adequate  for 
all  of  the  irrigable  lands  of  both  upper  and  lower  basins  have  not  served  to  allay  the 
fear.  Another  cause  of  alarm  in  Colorado  is  the  doubt  as  to  whether  that  State  will 
be  allowed  to  divert  310.000  acre-feet  of  water  per  year  from  the  Colorado  basin,  through 
tunnels  at  narrow  places  in  the  watershed,  for  use  on  the  plains  north  and  east  of 
Denver,  as  is  desired. 

The  upper  States  therefore  are  demanding  a  guaranty  of  unrestricted  irrigation 
development  in  the  upper  basin  before  they  will  lend  their  support  or  consent  to  a 
Federal  project  in  the  canyon  region.  The  lower-basin  States  are  asking  for  an  allot- 
ment of  the  water  supply  among  the  seven  States. 

The  wisdom  of  a  perpetual  guaranty  or  of  an  allotment  of  the  waters  of  the  river 
is  questionable.  On  no  other  river  basin  has  either  been  attempted.  It  is  not  possi- 
ble to  foresee  conditions  a  hundred  years  ahead,  or  even  30  years  ahead.  All  irri- 
gators  who  are  putting  the  water  to  beneficial  use  should  be  protected,  but  in  princi- 
ple it  may  be  exceedingly  dangerous  to  reserve  a  valuable  water  supply  for  a  project 
which  may  prove  to  be  of  doubtful  feasibility.  If  an  allotment  of  the  water  is 
attempted,  most  of  the  seven  States  will  advance  extravagant  claims  to  water.  Some 
of  the  States  most  involved  have  no  adequate  conception  of  the  feasibility  of  their 
projects,  and  no  just  allotment  can  be  made  without  thorough  surveys  of  all  proposed 
irrigation  lands.  It  is  unlikely  that  any  allotment  can  be  proposed  which  will  not 
be  held  up  in  some  legislature  for  many  years,  and  meanwhile  the  ruin  of  the  Imperial 
Valley  may  be  accomplished. 

There  is  no  necessity  for  a  distribution  of  the  unused  water  rights  at  this  time. 
If  the  act  to  appropriate  money  for  a  Colorado  River  project  shall  state  as  follows: 
''Provided.  That  nothing  in  this  act  shall  be  so  construed  as  to  affect  in  any  way  the 
rights  to  the  use  of  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  Basin  of  any  State  or  any  part  of  a  State, " 
then  the  upper  States  can  not  be  affected  adversely  by  the  project. 

The  average  annual  discharge  of  the  river  into  the  Gulf  of  California  is  13,000,000 
acre-feet.  The  projects  of  the  upper  basin  are  such  that  probably  no  more  than 
3,000,000  acre-feet  of  water  additional  can  be  consumed  in  those  projects,  and  the 
balance  of  10,000,000  acre-feet  is  more  than  twice  as  much  as  the  States  of  the  lower 
basin  can  use — at  least  until  a  different  economic  order  shall  prevail. 

Congress,  through  the  Mondell  Act,  has  provided  for  a  Colorado  River  Commission 
'•(•insisting  of  one  representative  from  each  of  the  seven  States  and  one  from  the  Fed- 
eral Government.  The  commission  is  now  organized,  with  Herbert  Hoover  as  its 
chairman,  representing  the  Federal  Government.  The  purpose  expressed  in  the 
Mondell  Act  is  the  negotiation  of  a  compact  or  agreement  providing  for  an  equitable 
division  or  apportionment  of  the  water  supply  among  the  seven  States. 

NAVIGABILITY. 

The  existing  treaty  with  Mexico  declares  the  Colorado  River  to  be  a  navigable 
stream,  and  a  Federal  court  prohibited  any  action  which  might  interfere  with  its 
navigability.  The  diversion  of  water  for  irrigation,  therefore,  is  contrary  to  the  treaty. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN.  163 

As  soon  as  diplomatic  relations  with  Mexico  are  reestablished  steps  should  be  taken 
to  amend  the  treaty  in  so  far  as  it  affects  the  Colorado.  The  river  should  be  declared 
to  be  an  unnavigable  stream. 

ARIZONA'S  PROGRAM. 

Arizona  owns  the  Colorado  River  bed,  or  half  of  it,  for  580  miles.  We  do  not  own 
the  water.  We  do  not  have  unlimited  millions  of  wealth  to  invest  in  the  Colorado 
enterprises,  nor  many  votes  in  Congress.  We  should  endeavor  to  cooperate  with  our 
neighbor  States.  When  the  seven  States  agree  upon  a  plan  of  action,  the  extreme 
urgency  of  the  case  will  secure  the  appropriation  needed. 

With  regard  to  some  features  of  the  project  Ari/onans  will  express  their  opinions 
but  should  not  insist  upon  them.  The  immediate  construction  of  the  storage  dam 
and  the  height  of  dam  and  the  type  of  dam  are  far  more  vital  to  California  than  to  us. 
Nothing  can  prevent  our  obtaining  all  the  power  the  State  can  use,  both  now  and  for 
50  years  to  come.  Our  preferential  rights  to  power  are  recognized.  Also  it  is  pro- 
posed to  grant  Arizona  and  Nevada  each  a  free  block  of  power  at  Boulder  site.  Our 
concern  must  be  to  insure  that  there  shall  be  no  monopoly  of  power  by  a  single  cor- 
poration and  that  every  nook  and  corner  of  the  State  shall  be  able  to  receive  power 
at  equitable  rates. 

We  should  pledge  the  State's  honor  to  the  States  of  the  upper  basin  that  any  con- 
struction of  dams  for  the  benefit  of  the  lower  basin  shall  not  prejudice  in  any  way  their 
equitable  rights. 

But  the  irrigation  of  our  lands  we  must  insist  on;  the  development  of  the  Parker 
protect  of  110,000  acres  and  of  the  Mohave  Valley  of  27,000  acres  and  of  the  Cibola 
Valley  of  15,000  acres,  and  that  the  right  to  double  the  acreage  under  irrigation  at 
Yuma,  as  is  contemplated,  shall  not  be  denied.  It  will  require  at  least  two  new 
diversion  dams  similar  to  the  Laguna  Dam,  and  they  must  be  started  in  time  to  be 
finished  when  the  storage  dam  is  finished.  The  great  river  control  dam  and  the  power 
will  be  secured  largely  because  California  is  fighting  with  us.  But  for  the  irrigation 
of  Arizona  lands  we  must  fight  alone.  It  does  not  follow  necessarily  that  our  lands 
will  be  irrigated  if  the  Boulder  Dam  or  Lees  Ferry  Dam  is  built.  Provision  for  the 
Parker  diversion  dam  should,  if  possible,  be  put  into  the  act  which  shall  provide 
for  the  larger  project.  Be  it  said  also  that  the  Parker  and  Mohave  projects  do  not 
have  the  usual  influential  citizens  and  real  estate  boosters  to  present  their  claims. 
They  are  still  under  the  care  of  the  United  States  Indian  Service.  Congress  passed 
an  act  for  their  opening  to  entry  several  years  ago,  and  the  matter  is  now  sleeping. 
There  are  only  a  few  Indians,  and  they  have  received  allotments.  It  is  the  finest 
opportunity  in  the  whole  United  States  to  provide  lands  for  former  service  men — 
not  less  than  3,500  of  them.  The  State  of  Arizona  has  got  to  speak  loudly  for  those 
projects. 

Lastly,  the  high-line  irrigation  project — what  of  it?  It  has  been  claimed  that  if 
the  high  dam  is  located  in  Boulder  Canyon,  water  can  be  turned  into  a  canal  on  a 
high  level,  and  led  through  the  mountain  passes  of  Mohave  County,  across  Bill  Wil- 
liams River,  through  the  Bouse  Valley  to  Harrisburg  Valley,  and  down  the  <  Vnlennial 
Wash  to  the  Gila  River.  The  writer  has  studied  all  the  available  data,  and  is  of  the 
opinion  that  the  project  is  not  feasible.  Regardless  of  how  desirable  it  would  be 
to  bring  under  irrigation  from  the  Colorado  River  an  extensive  area  of  elevated  desert 
land,  yet  it  is  better  for  the  people  of  Arizona  to  dream  no  vague  dreams  and  to  con- 
centrate all  efforts  to  obtain  those  developments  which  arc  practicable. 

In  the  first  place,  the  high-line  project  would  require  a  clam  500  or  600  feet  high 
to  raise  the  water  to  the  level  of  the  canal.  A  great  reservoir  of  dead  storage  water 
would  be  created,  for  the  water  level  could  never  again  be  allowed  to  fall  below  the 
elevation  of  the  canal.  Storage  to  regulate  and  equalize  the  water  supply  must  ix- 
provided  by  building  the  dam  considerably  higher  than  the  canal  level  or  by  means 
of  another  reservoir,  preferably  at  Lees  Ferry.  Probably  there  would  be  two  great 
dams  required  instead  of  one. 

The  high-line  canal  would  be  built  along  the  rough  mountain  sides  of  Mohave 
County,  but  no  water  could  be  taken  through  the  Sacramento  Valley  Pass  or  through 
any  other  pass  to  lands  behind  the  mountain  range  that  borders  the  river  in  that 
county. 

Assuming  an  elevation  of  1,200  feet  above  sea  level  for  the  canal  at  its  head,  the 
elevation  in  the  vicinity  of  Bouse  would  be  about  1,050  feet,  120  feet  lower  than  the 
proposed  canal  that  is  designed  to  irrigate  the  Bous<>  Valley  from  the  Williams  Rivet. 
About  90,000  acres  in  the  Bouse  Valley  could  be  irrigated  by  pumping  from  the 
canal.  By  boosting  the  water  350  feet  by  means  of  pumps,  the  water  could  be  led 
to  Vicksbiirg,  and  then  another  boost  of  500  feet  would  deliver  it  into  the  Harrisburg 
Valley,  or,  perhaps  it  would  be  cheaper  to  avoid  the  last-named  lift  by  tunneling 


164  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

through  the  Little  Harquahala  Mountains.  It  would  be  more  feasible  to  leave  the 
Little  Harquahalas  and  Coyote  Mountain  to  the  east  of  the  canal,  but  even  so,  the 
pumping  lift  would  be  impractical.  The  maximum  area  that  could  be  brought  under 
such  a  high-line  system  would  be  less  than  a  million  acres,  mostly  in  Yuma  County. 

As  an  alternative  proposal,  the  water  for  the  high-line  canal  might  be  dropped  at 
the  high  dam,  generating  power,  and  this  power  could  be  used  to  lift  the  water  from 
the  river  near  Parker  into  a  high-line  canal  starting  at  that  point.  The  electrical 
transmission  losses  would  be  no  larger  in  percentage  than  the  seepage  and  evapora- 
tion losses  of  water  from  the  260  miles  of  canal,  and  the  investment  would  be  less. 
About  1  kilowatt  would  be  required  per  acre  irrigated  for  the  main  lift  to  elevation 
1,060  at  Parker,  requiring  an  investment  of  about  $100  per  acre  for  power  equipment, 
while  the  cost  of  the  canal  from  the  high  dam  to  Parker  would  be  more  than  twice 
as  much.  The  value  of  the  power  used  on  this  one  lift,  per  irrigated  acre,  at  one-half 
cent  per  kilowatt  hour,  would  be  about  $30  per  year.  Neither  proposition  is  feasible, 
at  least  not  during  the  present  generation.  An  investment  of  over  ,$300  per  acre 
would  be  required.  The  best  raw  valley  land  in  Arizona  can  not  stand  a  construc- 
tion change  for  irrigation  over  $150  per  acre. 

There  is  one  possibility  for  which  plans  and  estimates  should  perhaps  be  prepared. 
This  is  the  possibility  of  pumping  from  the  river  at  or  near  Cocopah  Point,  near  the 
head  of  I.aguna  Lake,  on  a  lift  of  about  350  feet,  to  a  canal  which  would  then  run  east- 
erly on  the  north  side  of  the  Lower  Gila  Valley,  crossing  the  river  near  Sentinel,  and 
running  thence  on  grade  toward  the  southwest,  covering  about  250.000  acres  of  land. 
Power  could  be  generated  at  Cocopah  Point  by  means  of  a  low  rock-fil!  dam  after  river 
regulation  has  been  secured  farther  upstream.  This  project  may  be  practicable  20 
years  hence. 

THE    GILA    RIVER    SYSTEM. 

It  seems  to  have  been  forgotten  that  the  Gila  tributary  is  a  vital  element  of  the 
Colorado  River,  and  that  the  study  of  Colorado  River  problems  must  take  cognizance 
of  the  necessity  for  river  regulation  on  the  Gila.  Be  it  remembered  that  it  was  the 
Gila  River  floods,  five  of  them,  in  the  winter  and  spring  of  1905  which  were  responsible 
for  the  great  disaster  of  that  year,  when  in  August  the  whole  of  the  river  was  diverted 
into  Imperial  Valley.  Had  it  not  been  for  the  continuous  high  water  and  repeated 
floods  of  the  Gila.  the  narrow  cut  from  the  temporary  heading  of  the  Imperial  Canal 
could  have  been  closed  easily.  The  Gila  flood  of  January  22,  1916.  was  greater  than 
the  highest  recorded  flood  of  the  Colorado  itself.  River  regulation  of  the  Gila  River 
is  absolutely  necessary  for  the  security  of  Yuma  and  Imperial  Valleys. 

About  seven  years  ago  when  the  Federal  Government  began  a  comprehensive  study 
of  Colorado  River  problems,  the  Gila  River  was  included  in  the  studies.  The  plans 
prepared  by  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service  at  that  time  provided  for  regula- 
tion of  the  Gila  by  means  of  a  dam  225  feet  high  near  Sentinel.  Ari/..  The  reservoir 
was  to  be  operated  for  stream  regulation  only,  and  would  have  been  of  little  service 
in  reclaiming  desert  lands  between  Sentinel  and  Yuma.  In  1918  borings  were  made 
at  the  dam  site  by  the  Reclamation  Service,  and  it  was  ascertained  that  suitable 
foundations  for  a  storage  dam  do  not  exist,  hence  the  Sentinel  project  was  abandoned. 

In  1920  the  Reclamation  Service  made  an  extensive  study  of  the  Gila  River  from 
source  to  mouth,  examining  all  possible  storage  sites.  It  was  concluded  that  the  best 
solution  of  water  problems  of  the  Gila  River  is  the  construction  of  the  San  Carlos  Dam. 
The  report  of  the  engineer.  Mr.  ( '.  ( '.  Fisher,  favors  a  dam  250  feet  high  above  bedrock, 
about  20  feet  lower  than  the  Roosevelt  Dam.  Mr.  Fisher  finds  that  the  irrigation 
project  should  have  an  area  of  148.000  acres.  In  February.  1921,  a  board  of  engineers 
of  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service  reviewed  the  Fisher  report.  The  board, 
recommends  that  the  dam  to  be  first  constructed  be  200  feet  in  height  and  that  in  the 
next  generation.  30  years  hence,  the  height  be  raised  to  250  feet.  The  board  states 
that  such  a  project  is  entirely  feasible,  provided  satisfactory  arrangements  can  be  made 
with  the  Arizona  Eastern  Railroad,  the  line  of  which  passes  through  the  reservoir 
site. 

The  San  Carlos  Dam  must  be  constructed.  Furthermore,  storage  must  be  provided 
on  the  Verde  River.  Additional  storage  is  needed  on  the  Salt  River,  and  with  this 
additional  storage  will  come  24.000  additional  hydroelectric  horsepower  at  the  Horse 
Mesa  Dam.  It  is  hoped,  too,  that  a  feasible  storage  project  on  the  Agua  Fria  can  be 
accomplished,  and  perhaps  the  Walnut  Grove  Dam  will  be  rebuilt  at 'some  time. 
Each  one  of  these  projects  will  reduce  materially  the  flood  crests  of  the  lower  Gila 
River. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF  LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX.  165 


Arizona's  program,  therefore,  should  be — 

1.  To  encourage  all  development  projects,  both  public  and  private,  on  the  Colorado 
River.     In  the  case  of  publicly  owned  projects,  the  State  must  receive  a  block  of 
free  power  in  lieu  of  taxes. 

2.  To  demand  that  as  much  power  be  allotted  to  this  State  as  can  be  used  by  this 
State. 

3.  To  demand  that  the  Federal  project  include  a  diversion  dam  at  Bulls  Head 
Rock  at  the  head  of  Mohave  Valley  and  one  at  Gatehead  Rock  at  the  head  of  the 
Parker  Valley. 

4.  To  demand  that  provision  for  river  regulation  on  the  Gila  River  be  included 
in  the  Federal  program. 

In  the  above  exposition  of  the  Colorado  River  problems  and  proposals  I  have  pre- 
sented the  case  from  the  Arizona  viewpoint.  Arizona's  future  is  to  a  high  degree 
wrapped  up  in  the  development  of  the  Colorado.  The  highest  statesmanship  is  de- 
manded at  this  time  that  the  latent  wealth  of  this  great  ntaural  resource  may  be  wisely 
and  speedily  secured  and  that  this  Commonwealth  may  share  in  its  benefits  in  the 
largest  practicable  measure. 


PHOEXIX,  ARIZ.,   May  31.  19,'.'. 
Hon.  CARL  HAYDEX. 

Mfmbtr  of  Congress.  Washington.  D.  C. 

My  DEAR  <'ARL:  I  received  from  vou  "Power  Development  on  the  Colorado  River 
and  its  Relation  to  Irrigation  and  Flood  Control."  by  E.  C.  Merrill,  secretary  of  the 
power  commission.  I  have  read  this  verv  carefully  and  believe  that  Mr.  Merrill  has 
some  extremely  good  ideas  and  if  he  had  a  better  knowledge  of  the  country  would 
probably  make  a  much  better  story. 

I  notice  by  this  morning's  paper  that  vou  have  introduced  a  bill  asking  for  an 
investigation  of  the  Colorado  River  as  to  dikes  and  other  river  protection,  especially 
as  to  Arizona;  that  this  investigation  is  to  be  made  by  the  Army  engineers. 

I  would  suggest  that  you  incorporate  in  this  bill  a  provision  for  the  full  investigation 
at  the  same  time  by  the  same  engineers  of  the  Glen  Canyon  Reservoir  for  control  of 
flood  waters  of  the  Colorado  River.  My  own  opinion  from  my  personal  study  of  the 
Colorado  River  and  its  conditions  is  that  the  Glen  Canyon  Dam  should  be  constructed 
a.-  a  river  control  reservoir  primarily  and  that  the  waters  from  the  Colorado  River 
should  be  di si -barged  from  this  dam  from  a  stabilized  stream  which  would  protect  all 
of  the  lower  country  both  in  Arizona  and  in  California.  This  would  enable  the  con- 
struction of  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  at  much  less  cost  and  in  a  much  shorter  time 
than  to  undertake  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  as  a  primary  construc- 
tion on  the  Colorado. 

The  Glen  Canyon  Dam  should  be  a  loose  rock  dam,  as  conditions  are  such  that  this 
would  be  the  most  economical  construction  and  could  be  more  rapidly  built  than  any 
other  type,  or  the  construction  of  other  dams  suggested.  There  may  be  some  criticism 
as  to  th'e  feasibility  of  damming  the  Colorado  River  by  the  blowing  of  the  canyon  walls 
into  the  river  and  iilliuirit  v  ith  loose  rock.  The  greatest  engineer  that  the  ^outhv.'est, 
has  ever  produced,  a  man  \\ho  had  the  ability  to  do  and  he  did  do.  proved  beyond  a 
possible  doubt  that  by  the  mere  dumping  of  rock  into  the  <  'olorado  River  it  v  as  possible 
to  dam  the  stream  in  material  that  no  other  dam  could  be  constructed.  This  <  ...s  done 
by  him  against  the  advice  of  the  engineers  of  the  Reclamation  .-.ervice  and.  I  beiie\e. 
the  Army  engineers,  and  airain-t  the  advice  of  the  nationally  known  and  men  of 
national  and  international  reputation  a.s  dam  builders.  I  refer  to  the  \\dnderful  feat 
of  Col.  Epes  Randolph  in  building  a  dam  a- TOSS  the  Colorado  River  \\hen  it  .-as  run- 
ning into  the  Imperial  Valley,  by  the  use  of  loose  rock  only  on  a  silt  foundation  and 
in  a  stream  that  had  but  silt  banks,  and  if  it  could  be  done  under  these  condition.-  ii 
most  assuredly  can  be  done  in  a  canvon  where  the  depth  !•>  bedrock  is  very  iimiled 
and  the  canyon  walls  are  solid  so  there  is  no  danger  of  the  stream  being  diverted 
around  the  end*  of  the  (ills. 

The  topography  of  the  Glen  Canyon  Reservoir  is  such  that  it  would  permit  of  the 
construction  of  a  discharge  tunnel  for  the  discharge  of  the  ( 'olorado  River  as  a  st  abili/ed 
stream  at  a  point  that  is  far  distant  from  the  possible  dam  site  and  would  interfere  in 
no  way  with  the  construction  of  the  dam.  The  time  limit  for  the  construction  of  this 
type  of  dam  at  this  point  is  only  limited  to  the  time  that  is  necessary  for  the  construc- 
tion ot  the  discharge  tunnel. 

That  the  storage  waters  from  the  Glen  Canyon  Dam  be  used  in  their  stabilized  dis- 
charge for  the  generation  of  electricity. 


166  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    BASIX. 

That  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  be  constructed  primarily  for  an  irrigation  reservoir 
to  store  the  stabalized  discharge  of  the  Colorado  River  from  the  Glen  Canyon  Reservoir 
and  of  an  added  storage  capacity  sufficient  to  store  the  flood  waters  of  the  Little  Colo- 
rado, the  Virgin  River,  and  other  streams  draining  the  catchment  basin  of  the  Colorado 
River  between  these  two  points. 

That  the  water  be  discharged  from  the  Boulder  Canyon  Reservoir  for  irrigation  and 
that  all  the  electricity  possible  be  developed  under  these  conditions;  that  is,  that  in 
the  wintertime,  when  the  irrigation  demands  are  at  the  minimum,  that  the  surplus 
stabilized  stream  of  the  Colorado  River  be  stored  in  the  Boulder  Creek  Reservoir. 
That  in  the  summer  time,  when  at  the  peak  of  irrigation,  that  the  water  be  discharged 
as  irrigation  requirements  so  that  the  horsepower  developed  at  this  point  would  be 
erratic  horsepower,  depending  on  the  amount  of  water  necessary  for  the  irrigation  of 
two  and  a  half  million  acres  of  land  in  Arizona  and  two  and  a  half  million  acres  of 
land  in  California  including  the  Imperial  Valley. 

That  the  canyon  between  these  two  reservoirs  with  the  stabilized  flow  of  tho 
Colorado  River  be  used  by  the  construction  of  power  dams  for  the  generation  of 
electricity,  and  as  the  river  is  stabilized  in  its  flow  the  electric  development  would  b« 
constant. 

I  would  further  suggest  that  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  be  used  as  a  diversion  dam. 
That  the  Army  engineers  make  a  study  of  the  possibilities  of  diverting  the  water 
from  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  in  the  neighboorhood  of  the  1,200  or  1,300  foot  contour. 
According  to  the  Government  contour  map  this  could  be  accomplished  by  the  driving 
of  a  tunnel  about  a  mile  in  length;  water  diverted  at  this  elevation  would  be  able  to 
be  discharged  by  gravity  for  irrigation  of  the  country  as  far  east  as  the  Buckeye  country 
on  the  Gila  River  30  miles  west  of  Phoenix.  The  Gillespie  Dam  could  be  used  for 
the  diverting  of  the  gravity  water  of  the  Colorado  and  the  Gila  Rivers,  or  for  the 
crossing  of  the  Gila  River  by  waters  of  the  Colorado  River,  using  an  enlarged  Gillespie 
canal  for  the  main  irrigation  canal  on  the  south  side  of  the  Gila  River,  and  this  canal 
could  be  extended  by  gravity  to  cover  the  enormous  acreage  on  the  low  valleys  in 
western  Maricopa  and  Yuma  Counties,  creating  an  empire  in  southwestern  Arizona, 
as  gravity  waters  of  this  canal  could  be  carried  to  the  south  of  the  Mohawk  Mountains, 
covering  all  of  the  Gila  Bend,  the  Sentinel,  the  Stovall,  and  that  wonderful  valley 
and  mesa  lying  between  the  Mohawk  and  Fortuna  Mountains  and  bringing  the  water 
by  <n-avity  covering  the  entire  Yuma  mesa  with  its  wonderful  frost  less  climate. 

It  would  permit  the  construction  of  a  high-line  canal  from  Boulder  Canyon  diversion 
on  the  California  side  of  the  river  covering  a  large  acreage  in  the  neighborhood  of  Nee- 
dles, Calif.,  the  entire  Blythe  country,  going  through  the  Chuckawalla  Valley  into  the 
Imperial  Valley,  putting  the  lands  that  lie  under  the  500  or  600  foot  above  the  sea  level 
contour  of  the  Salton  Basin,  under  irrigation.  This  would  mean  that  this  high-line 
canal  would  cross  the  "White  Water  River  above  the  Palm  Springs  that  are  near  the 
Southern  Pacific  Railroad  west  of  Indio  and  at  the  base  of  San  Jacinto  Mountain 
peak. 

The  carrying  out  of  this  plan  would  eliminate  the  building  of  the  proposed  "all- 
American  canal :'  for  the  Imperial  Valley  with  its  cost  of  840,000,000  and  would  add 
to  the  California  empire  at  least  one  million  and  a  half  acres  of  land  that  would  not  be 
capabable  of  being  irrigated  from  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  River  by  gravity  under 
any  other  plan. 

I  do  not  know  if  the  United  States  Senate  and  the  United  States  Congress  and  the 
people  of  the  East  appreciate  how  serious  a  question  the  Colorado  River  is  to-day  as 
to  the  Imperial  Valley  and  the  Yuma  project.  Since  the  diversion  of  the  waters  of 
the  Colorado  River  into  the  Imperial  Valley  the  floor  of  the  Colorado  River  has  been 
building  up  an  average  of  about  1  foot  per  year  and  to-day  the  river  is  running  on  the 
top  of  the  Hogback  and  is  held  there  by  dikes  that  have  required  additional  height 
of  a  foot  a  year  to  protect  the  people,  the  homes,  the  wealth,  and  the  civilization  that 
has  been  created  in  the  Salton  Basin.  If  a  complete  break  is  made  by  the  Colorado 
River  into  the  Imperial  Valley  it.  will  destroy  the  entire  Yuma  project,  the  Southern 
Pacific  Railroad  at  the  Colorado  River  and  west  of  it.  the  Laguna  Dam,  the  irrigation 
by  gravity  of  the  Blythe  country,  and  all  the  Parker  Indian  Reservation,  as  before 
the  Salton  sink  is  filled  the  erosion  of  the  Colorado  River  at  the  Yuma  Bridge  will  be 
in  the  neighborhood  of  80  feet. 

It  would  take  a  book  to  write  you  a  full  description  of  the  possibilities  of  the  Colo- 
rado River  developed  under  this  plan,  but  if  you  will  take  a  map  of  Arizona  and  realize 
that,  the  gravity  waters  in  a  high-line  canal,  as  suggested  here,  will  cross  the  Arizona  & 
California  Railroad  in  the  neighborhood  of  Bouse,  Ariz.,  covering  the  Harqua  Hala 
Plains  and  tailing  into  the  Centennial  Wash  that  discharges  its  water  into  the  Gila 
River  above  the  Gillespie  Dam.  This  will  give  you  a  foundation  for  the  studying 
of  the  possibilities  of  this  development.  If  there  are  points  that  you  would  like  to 


DEVELOPMENT   OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN".  167 

have  more  definite  information  on,  if  you  will  advise  me  I  will  try  and  give  them  to 
you.     It  is  a  big  question  and  one  that  to  date  sufficient  data  has  not  been  gathered  to 
make  a  detailed  estimate  of  cost  or  possibilities  of  such  a  scheme. 
Thanking  you  for  the  courtesies  of  the  past,  I  am, 
Sincerely  yours, 

JAMES  C.  DOBBINS,  Civil    Engineer. 


AN  ARIZONA  ENGINEER'S  VIEWS  OF  THE  COLORADO  PROJECT. 
[By  A.  G.  McGregor,  Warren,  Ariz.] 

The  relation  of  the  Colorado  River  project  to  mining  in  Arizona  is  well  expressed 
in  the  following  excerpt  from  an  address  delivered  on  December  15  last,  to  the 
Arizona  Industrial  Congress  by  Dr.  L.  D.  Ricketts,  whose  first-hand  knowledge  of 
Arizona's  mining  industry  is  unsurpassed.  In  discussing  its  problems,  he  said: 

"The  other  and  much  more  serious  question  is  that  of  fuel.  Several  years  ago 
when  the  mining  companies  requested  bids  from  California  we  were  told  by  the 
large  producers  that  they  had  no  fuel  oil  for  sale,  but  we  were  fortunate  enough  to 
make  an  advantageous  contract  for  Mexican  oil.  I  believe  it  is  only  a  question  now 
of  a  few  years  when  this  commodity  will  become  so  costly  that  we  can  not  afford 
to  use  it.  We  probably  can  get  an  ini->rior  coal  at  high  cost  that  will  be  sufficient 
for  smelting  purposes,  but  I  hope  we  will  not  be  obliged  to  use  this  coal  for  power. 

"I  have  had  the  subject  of  power  carefully  canvassed.-  I  find  that  the  mines  and 
smelters  of  the  Southwest,  including  northern  Sonora.  now  use  about  70,000  horse- 
power in  addition  to  the  power  they  recover  from  waste  heat,  and  my  report  shows 
that  it  is  probable  this  demand  will  increase  to  over  100,000  horsepower  in  the  next 
four  or  five  years.  I  wish  most  urgently  to  bring  to  your  attention  the  fact  that 
Arizona  needs  cheap  power  and  is  faced  with  the  most  serious  menace  if  it  does  not 
get  it.  and  the  only  source  of  cheap  power  that  I  know  is  the  Colorado  River.  *  * 
If  cheap  power  can  be  obtained  in  Arizona.  I  believe  there  will  be  an  extension  of 
leaching  in  contradistinction  to  smelting,  and  that  the  refining  industry  and  the 
production  of  electrolytic  copper  in  Arizona  will  become  a  great  and  important 
industry.  I  have  to-day  able  chemists  at  work  trying  to  devise  methods  of  leaching 
certain  classes  of  mixed  and  sulphide  ores  in  order  to  provide  in  the  future  for  con- 
tingencies of  which  I  speak." 

Normally  about  60.000  tons  of  ore  is  mined  in  Arizona  per  day.  In  mining  and 
smelting  this  amount  of  ore,  the  fuel  used  for  power  and  for  furnaces  amounts  to  the 
equivalent  of  about  8,000,000  barrels  of  oil  annually.  This  fuel  could  be  entirely 
replaced  and  conserved  for  other  purposes  by  the  direct  use  of  hydroelectric  power 
in  mining  op-  i-ations  and  for  electrolytic  copper  precipitation  and  electric  furnace 
smelting.  There  ;«  enough  power  going  to  waste  annually  in  the  Canyon  of  the 
Colorado  to  replar-  •  all  the  fuel  now  consumed  in  Arizona  for  industrial  purposes 
tenfold. 

Arizona  has  another  important  interest  in  cheap  power.  Considerable  land  is  now 
cultivated  in  Arizona  that  receives  its  water  for  irrigation  through  expensive  power 
pumping  from  depths  van-ing  from  10  feet  to  75  feet.  With  cheap  powei  vastly  greater 
acreages  would  be  reclaimed  in  this  way.  The  additional  land  to  be  reclaimed  by 
direct  diversion  from  the  Colorado  will  be  small  compared  with  the  land  to  be  re- 
claimed through  cheap  power  for  pumping  in  Arizona  and  California. 

The  conditions  are  such  that  cheap  power  can  only  be  obtained  in  the  canyon 
through  enormously  large  developments,  and  herein  lies  the  reason  why  all  the  poten- 
tial power  of  the  Colorado  is  still  going  to  waste.  For  the  best  ultimate  results  from  a 
single  dam  in  the  canyon,  it  should  have  sufficient  reservoir  capacity  back  of  it  for 
equalizing  the  flow  of  the  river  throughout  the  year.  Such  a  dam  at  a  suitable  loca- 
tion would  be  500  feet  high  and  would  have  a  capacity  of  BOO. 000  horsepower.  Due 
to  the  fact  that  some  time  will  be  required  after  the  completion  of  the  first  project  to 
develop  a  market  for  a  block  of  power  as  large  as  000,000  horsepower,  it  is  difficult  for 
a  private  corporation,  which  must  have  interest  on  its  r-apital  from  the  start,  to  finance 
so  large  a  development. 

DEVELOPMENT  BY  THE  GOVERNMENT. 

The  Government  should  promptly  build  a  dam  for  flood  control  and  for  equalizing 
the  flow  of  the  river,  with  a  view  of  not  demanding  an  immediate  return  on  the  invest- 
ment, but  with  the  assurance  it  will  be  returned  many  fold,  just  as  it  had  at  the  time 

1316— 22— PT  3 7 


168      DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLOEADO  RIVER  BASIX. 

of  investing  in  the  Louisiana.  Alaska,  and  other  purchases,  and  the  Panama  Canal. 
The  Government's  investment  in  a  dam  is  fully  justified  by  any  one  of  the  following 
consideration? : 

(a)  The  removal  of  the  flood  menace  to  the  Imperial  Valley. 

(b)  The  direct  financial  return  in  the  sale  of  cheap  power,  and  the  industrial  and 
agricultural  development  that  will  result. 

(c)  The  conservation  of  the  great  quantities  of  fuel  now  being  consumed  yearly. 

THE   PACT   BETWEEN   THE    STATES   OP  THE    COLORADO    BASIN. 

It  is  very  desirable  that  the  seven  States  of  the  basin  agree  as  to  their  respective 
rights  to  the  use  of  the  water  of  the  Colorado  in  order  to  prevent  future  interstate 
disputes  and  litigation.  After  a  suitable  storage  dam  is  built  in  the  canyon,  I  believe 
there  is  no  likelihood  of  a  shortage  of  water  in  the  lower  States  for  irrigation  by  direct 
diversion,  for  generations,  if  ever.  I  believe,  however,  no  State  should  be  asked  to 
subscribe  to  a  policy  that  will  specifically  prevent  its  citizens  from  diverting  water 
from  the  Colorado  for  irrigation,  as  long  as  there  is  no  use  for  the  water  elsewhere  in 
the  basin.  Also,  a  lower  State  should  not  be  asked  to  subscribe  to  a  policy  that  will 
permit  diversion  of  water  on  new  lands  in  an  upper  State,  if  .such  diversion  will  cause 
the  abandonment  in  a  lower  State  of  lands  and  homes  already  developed  at  great 
expense. 

The  active  opposition  of  the  upper  States  can  undoubtedly  delay  a  Federal  appro- 
priation for  the  proposed  Colorado  River  Dam,  and  make  it  difficult  to  secure.  The 
upper  States,  however,  should  not  take  advantage  of  this  situation  and  strive  to  gain 
concessions  from  the  lower  States  now  which  are  unjust  and  uneconomical  to  the  best 
interests  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  as  a  whole.  I  believe  the  best  interests 
of  the  United  States  as  a  whole  is  the  proper  criterion  upon  which  to  base  a  pact. 
On  this  basis,  I  believe  the  use  of  water  for  power  should  not  be  given  any  priority 
over  the  use  for  irrigation,  at  least  until  after  the  last  feasible  power  dam  is  built  in 
the  canyon. 

ARIZONA   AND   CALIFORNIA. 

If  the  proposed  pact  between  the  States  proves  a  stumbling  block  or,  for  other 
reasons,  the  Federal  Government  can  not  be  induced  to  construct  the  dam  promptly, 
then  the  States  of  Arizona  and  California  should  finance  the  construction  of  the  first 
storage  dam.  They  can  be  assured  of  an  ample  return,  direct  and  indirect,  on  the 
investment  within  a  comparatively  short  time  to  justify  the  outlay. 

The  States  interested  will  benefit  so  much  more  from  the  development  of  the 
Colorado  River  than  a  private  corporation  can  possibly  benefit,  that  they  should  not 
hesitate  to  finance  the  project,  the  burden  of  which  will  last  only  a  comparatively 
short  time.  If  they  will  not  finance  the  project  directly  themselves,  then  they  should 
assist  private  capital  in  every  way  possible  to  do  it.  1  believe  the  States  of  Arizona 
and  California,  on  account  of  their  close  contact  and  vital  interest,  could  probably 
be  depended  upon  to  direct  the  work  through  the  ordinary  methods  of  handling 
public  work,  more  efficiently  than  the  Federal  Government.  I  believe,  however, 
that  a  better  plan  must  be  worked  out  for  handling  some  of  these  superpower  projects 
now  being  discussed  if  the  full  benefits  are  to  be  derived.  I  believe  a  cooperative 
organization  of  the  prospective  power  users,  who  will  eventually  pay  all  the  bills, 
could  be  worked  out  that  would  handle  such  a  project  as  effectively  and  as  efficiently 
as  a  private  corporation  could. 

LOCATION   OF  THE   DAM. 

There  are  two  locations  for  dams  in  the  canyon  having  reservoir  sites  back  of  them. 
One  is  at  the  head  of  the  canyon,  near  Lees  Ferry  or  Glen  Canyon,  having  storage 
capacity  for  about  three  years'  average  flow  of  the  river.  The  other  is  at  Boulder 
Canyon,  near  the  lower  end  of  the  defile,  having  a  storage  for  about  a  year's. flow  of 
the  river  with  the  same  height  of  dam.  There  are  a  number  of  good  sites  for  power 
dams,  having  little  storage  capacity  back  of  them,  between  the  upper  and  the  lower 
storage  sites.  Eventually  there  will  be  six  or  eight  dams  in  the  canyon,  developing 
a  total  of  6,000,000  horsepower. 

So  far  most  of  the  noise  has  been  raised  in  favor  of  Boulder  Canyon:  however,  from 
every  standpoint,  I  believe  the  upper  site  has  a  decided  advantage: 

(a)  For  flood  control,  while  the  upper  site  does  not  intercept  the  floods  of  several 
small  streams  which  would  be  intercepted  by  a  dam  at  Boulder  Canyon,  the  upper 
dam  with  its  much  greater  storage  capacity  and  area,  under  the  conditions,  would 
constitute  a  safer  control  for  the  extraordinary  floods  of  the  main  river,  which  are  the 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLOEADO   RIVER  BASIN.  169 

real  menace  to  the  Imperial  Valley,  and  the  upper  larger  reservoir  will  be  none  too 
large  to  take  care  of  such  a  flood  when  it  comes. 

(6)  For  reclamation  there  is  not  much  choice,  though  on  account  of  the  wide  varia- 
tions in  the  total  flow  from  year  to  year,  the  larger  storage  would  have  an  advantage 
if  the  lands  of  the  basin  are  ever  developed  to  the  extent  that  there  is  a  shortage  of 
water  for  irrigation  in  Arizona  and  California.  On  account  of  the  very  excessive  cost 
of  the  necessary  canals  in  the  canyon,  neither  dam  can  be  used  as  a  diversion  dam  for 
irrigation. 

(e)  From  the  standpoint  of  power,  the  upper  site  has  many  important  advantages 
over  the  lower  site. 

(1)  By  putting  the  liver  under  control  at  the  head  of  the  canyon,  the  cost  of  con- 
structing subsequent  power  dams  below  will  be  greatly  reduced. 

(2)  By  equalizing  the  flow  at  the  head  of  the  canyon,  each  500- foot  power  dam  below 
will  have  a  continuous  capacity  of  1,000.000  horsepower  instead  of  only  about  250.000 
horsepower  duiing  the  long  low-water  season  each  year,  which  would  be  the  case  with- 
out the  large  storage  above. 

(3)  To  insure  safety  to  the  Imperial  Vaile. ,  it  will  be  necessary  to  draw  down  the 
water  in  either  reservoir  each  year  in  order  to  make  room  for  the  enormous  June 
floods  of  the  river.     Naturally  the  reservoir  having  the  larger  capacity  can  be  safely 
maintained  at  a  higher  head  and  as  a  consequence  can  be  depended  upon  for  a  greater 
power  output  throughout  the  year. 

(4)  On  account  of  the  wide  variations  in  the  total  flow  of  the  river  from  year  to  year, 
the  larger  reservoir  has  a  decided  advantage  from  the  standpoint  of  the  amount  of 
power  it  can  deliver  continuously. 

(5)  The  windings  of  the  river  above  Lee's  Ferry,  the  vertical  walls  1,400  feet  high, 
and  the  flat  at  Lee's  Ferry  are  all  so  related  as  to  afford  a  dam  and  power  plant  that 
is  safer  and  less  expensive  to  construct  and  one  that  can  be  operated  with  greater 
comfort  and  satisfaction  to  the  attendants  as  compared  with  the  Boulder  Canyon  site. 

(6)  The  upper  reservoir  and  power  site  is  closer  to  the  great  bulk  of  the  Arizona 
power  load. 

The  only  disadvantage  Lee's  Ferry  has  over  Boulder  Canyon  is  its  greater  distance 
from  the  prospective  power  load  of  southern  California.  This  is  important,  but  due 
to  the  recent  developments  in  high  voltage  transmission  I  believe  it  is  of  much  less 
importance  than  was  anticipated  by  the  reclamation  engineers  when  writing  their 
recommendations,  and  I  believe  would  be  readily  offset  by  almost  any  one  of  the 
first  five  advantages  set  forth  above. 

TYPE    OF   CONSTRUCTION. 

The  late  distinguished  engineer,  Epes  Randolph,  who  dammed  the  Colorado  River 
in  1907  and  saved  the  Imperial  Valley,  suggested  taking  advantage  of  a  means  that 
nature  has  so  generously  provided  for  bringing  the  river  under  control.  He  suggested 
making  a  rock  fill  dam  by  blasting  off  the  vertical  cliffs  of  the  canyon  at  a  suitable  site. 

I  believe  a  wide,  properly  constructed  rock  fill  dam,  with  flattened  slopes,  similar 
to  the  Gatun  Dam  at  the  Panama  Canal,  which  is  1£  miles  long  and  115  feet  high,  will 
be  the  safest  that  can  be  devised  and  will  withstand  the  changes  of  time  with  the 
least  possible  danger  of  disaster. 

I  believe  the  feasibility  of  building  the  concrete  dam  at  Boulder  Canyon,  with 
foundations  150  feet  below  the  water  level  as  proposed  by  the  reclamation  engineers, 
is  not  only  questionable  from  an  engineering  standpoint  under  the  adverse  conditions 
obtaining,  but  is  a  great  waste  of  valuable  time  and  many  millions  of  dollars,  and, 
with  the  possible  changes  of  time,  may  constitute  a  serious  menace  to  life  and  prop- 
erty below.  While  the  rock-fill  dam  would  not  be  a  monument  of  art,  it  would  appeal 
to  Epes  Randolph  as  a  monument  of  good  engineering.  Why  shouldn't  the  first 
dam  on  the  Colorado  be  a  "Randolph"  dam? 

In  conclusion  I  wish  to  emphasize  my  contention  that  the  location  and  type  of 
construction  of  the  dam  in  the  Colorado  River  are  strictly  engineering  problems, 
and  if  the  Government  undertakes  the  work,  which  I  hope  it  will,  promptly,  those 
questions  should  be  settled  by  a  proper  board  of  engineers. 

APRIL  27,  1922. 

COLORADO  RIVKR  DEVELOPMENT — ARIZONA  VIEWPOINT. 

[By  Cleon  T.  Knupp,  Histiec,  Ariz.] 

Power  development  on  the  Colorado  River  is  a  problem  of  immediate  importance 
to  Arizona.  The  agricultural,  industrial,  and  other  interests  of  the  Stale  require 
some  immediate  utilization  of  the  power  possibilities  of  the  river. 


170  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

The  people  of  Arizona  feel  a  proprietorship  in  the  Colorado  River  and  look  upon 
it  as  one  of  the  State's  greatest  and  most  important  natural  resources.  It  flows  through 
Arizona  for  approximately  250  miles  and  then  for  an  additional  200  miles  or  so  forms 
the  boundary  between  Arizona  and  the  States  of  Nevada  and  California.  Ninety  per 
cent  of  the  water  of  the  river  that  empties  into  the  Gulf  flows  into  Arizona  at  the 
Utah  line.  Many  thousands  of  acres  of  arid  land  in  western  Arizona  can  be  reclaimed 
through  the  construction  of  a  large  impounding  reservoir  on  the  Colorado  River  at 
Boulder  or  Glen  Canyon  and  placing  the  water  on  the  lands  by  gravity  flow,  but  it 
is  safe  to  say  that  a  greater  acreage  of  arid  lands  in  Arizona  can  be  reclaimed  through 
the  development  of  cheap  power  from  the  river.  In  any  part  of  Arizona  not  over  an 
altitude  of  3,000  feet,  water  is  easily  available  for  reclamation  purposes  were  cheap 
power  possible  for  pumping  it  to  the  surface.  The  agricultural  interests  of  Arizona 
are  vitally  interested  in  the  problem. 

The  principal  industry  of  Arizona  is  mining,  which  represents  more  than  50  per 
cent  of  the  assessed  valuation  in  the  State.  That  industry  employs  at  least  75  per 
cent  of  the  employed  labor  in  the  State.  Anything  that  aflects  it  reflects  at  once 
upon  the  prosperity  of  the  State.  This  has  been  clearly  shown  during  the  past  year 
when  practically  all  of  the  mines  in  the  State  have  been  closed  down,  and  thousands 
of  employees  have  been  out  of  work  and  many  in  want.  The  mining  companies  have 
emerged  from  the  war  period  with  high  material  and  labor  costs.  The  price  of  copper, 
the  leading  metal,  has  fallen  so  low  that  successful  operations  of  some  properties  are 
commercially  impossible.  And  in  addition  there  has  been  practically  no  market  for 
copper.  The  mining  companies  use  vast  quantities  of  fuel  oil.  and  its  high  cost  and 
fast  diminishing  supply  makes  it  imperative  that  the  mining  interests  look  elsewhere 
for  a  source  of  power.  And  they,  like  the  farmers,  are  looking  to  the  Colorado  River. 
But  not  15  or  20  years  from  now,  but  at  once.  Cheap  power  under  present  operating 
conditions  may  prove  to  be  the  determining  factor,  as  to  whether  or  not  certain  pro- 
perties can  operate.  And  power  35  years  from  now  will  not  help  those  mines  that  will 
become  exhausted  before  that  time.  So  it  would  seem  safe  to  say  that  the  problem 
of  the  mining  industry,  in  this  respect,  is  likewise  the  problem  of  the  State.  There 
are,  of  course,  the  usual  municipalities  that  would  receive  the  beneficial  results 
from  any  power  development  on  the  Colorado  River.  And  it  is  quite  probable  that 
manufacturing  interests  would  be  at  once  attracted  to  Arizona  as  a  field  for  operations, 
through  the  inducement  of  cheap  power.  Even  copper,  which  is  now  shipped  East, 
might  be  refined  in  Arizona.  The  possibilities  are  great,  and  the  problem  is  one  that 
is  of  immediate  importance  to  Arizona  and  its  prosperity. 

GIRAND    PROJECT. 

Fortunately  for  Arizona  a  power  project  is  proposed  to  be  immediately  developed 
on  the  Colorado  River  at  Diamond  Creek.  This  is  known  as  the  Girand  project, 
application  No.  121,  before  the  Federal  Power  Commission.  This  is  solely  a  power 
project,  with  a  limited  storage  capacity,  and  no  water  will  or  could  be  taken  from  the 
river.  James  B.  Girand,  of  Phoenix,  Ariz.,  in  November.  1913,  filed  application  for 
this  power  project  with  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  under  the  then  existing  law. 
He  was  the  first  to  visualize  the  possibilities  and  to  act  upon  his  faith  and  judgment. 
In  May,  1915,  the  Secretaries  of  Interior  and  Agriculture  issued  a  preliminary  permit 
to  Girand.  In  May,  1920,  and  before  the  enactment  of  the  present  Federal  power 
act,  Girand  filed  his  application  for  a  final  power  permit.  The  filing  was  made  with 
the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  and  was  accepted  as  being  in  due  and  proper  form. 
During  all  the  years  intervening  between  1913  and  1920  Girand  complied  with  all 
the  requirements  of  the  law,  and  with  such  limited  capital  as  he  commanded,  pre- 
served his  legal  rights,  in  spite  of  obstacles  that  would  have  discouraged  many.  Dur- 
ing that  period  he  expended  approximately  $75,000  to  protect  his  legal  rights  and  to 
furnish  the  data  and  maps  required  under  the  law. 

In  June,  1920,  and  before  Girand's  application  for  a  final  permit  was  acted  upon 
by  the  Interior  Department,  Congress  enacted  the  present  Federal  power  act.  Girand, 
at  the  suggestion  of  the  Federal  Power  Commission,  thereupon  transferred  his  applica- 
tion and  files  from  the  Interior  Department  to  the  Federal  Power  Commission,  in 
December,  1920.  In  June,  1921,  the  Federal  Power  Commission  issued  a  preliminary 
permit  to  Girand,  and  asked  for  further  data  and  information.  The  preliminary 
permit  provides  in  article  4  that  a  license  will  be  issued  to  Girand  when  it  appears 
that  his  scheme  of  development  is  adaptable  to  the  best  utilization  of  the  site.  Girand, 
relying  upon  that  assurance  and  the  terms  of  the  preliminary  permit  of  June.  1921, 
thereupon  expended  approximately  $25,000  additional  to  furnish  the  further  data 
requested  by  the  Federal  Power  Commission.  In  February,  1922,  Girand  filed  that 
data  and  maps,  and  made  application  for  a  license.  It  is  now  pending  before  the 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX.  171 

Federal  Power  Commission,  and  Girand  is  asking  for  immediate  action.  He  has  the 
necessary  financial  support  to  develop  this  project.  Its  development  will  come  at 
once  and  bring  to  Arizona  the  power  which  will  answer  the  imperative  needs  of  the 
agricultural,  industrial,  and  municipal  interests.  Arizona  needs  this  and  wants  it 
now. 

The  Girand  project  will  not  interfere  with  any  flood  control,  reclamation  or  power 
project  on  the  Colorado  River.  It  will  help  the  flood  control  to  the  extent  of  its  limited 
reservoir  capacity.  It  can  not  affect  reclamation,  because  no  water  can  I  e  taken 
from  the  river  at  this  site.  All  water  impounded  must  flow  through  or  over  the  dam, 
and  therefore  the  water  supply  is  not  diminished  one  drop.  The  development  of 
power  at  the  Girand  project  would  be  helpful  in  the  event  of  Government  construc- 
tion at  Boulder  Canyon,  through  power  that  could  be  furnished  during  the  construc- 
tion period  at  Boulder  Canyon,  and  in  the  regulation  of  the  flow  of  the  river. 

Girand  claims  that  under  the  law  and  the  terms  of  his  preliminary  permit,  that  he 
is  legally  entitled  to  a  license  now.  In  other  words,  that  the  Federal  Power  Commis- 
sion has  no  alternative  but  to  issue  the  license.  We  confidently  assert  that  such  must 
be  the  legal  interpretation  of  the  law.  Girand,  for  eight  years,  has  complied  with 
every  requirement  of  the  law  and  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  and  Federal  Power 
Commission,  with  the  asurance  and  distinct  understanding  that  a  license  would  be 
isued  to  him.  His  preliminary  permit  is  an  agreement  signed  by  both  Girand  and  the 
Federal  Power  Commission,  setting  forth  the  terms  upon  which  the  license  would  be 
issued.  Girand  has  complied  with  those  terms.  He  has  expended  approximately 
$100,000  and  given  years  of  his  time,  to  comply  with  the  conditions  imposed  upon 
him  by  the  Government,  under  an  agreement  that  by  so  doing  the  Government  would 
issue  him  a  license.  It  would  seem  clear  that  the  Government  is  both  legally  and 
morally  bound  to  do  so. 

FACTORS    DELAYING    LICENSE. 

The  Colorado  River  Commission  is  composed  of  a  representative  from  each  of  the 
seven  basin  States,  with  Secretary  Hoover  as  chairman.  Under  the  laws  creating 
the  commission,  it  is  designed  to  arrive  at  an  agreement  among  the  seven  basin  States 
of  the  Colorado  River,  allocating  the  waters  of  the  river.  It  has  no  jurisdiction  over 
power  projects  solely.  After  Girand  filed  his  application  for  a  license  on  February 
27,  1;)22.  with  the  Federal  Power  Commission,  a  letter  was  written  by  the  Federal 
Power  Commission  to  the  Colorado  River  Commission  asking  if  there  were  any  objec- 
tions to  the  issuance  of  the  Girand  license.  Chairman  Hoover  and  several  members 
of  the  Colorado  River  Commission  had  no  hesitancy  in  stating  that  in  their  opinion 
the  Colorado  River  Commission  had  no  jurisdiction  over  the  Girand  project  as  it  was 
solely  a  power  project.  At  a  meeting  of  the  Colorado  River  Commission  held  in 
Phoenix,  Ariz.,  on  March  15,  1922.  the  commission  took  action  upon  the  letter  of  the 
Federal  Power  Commission  and  held  that  it  had  no  objection  to  the  issuance  of  the 
Girand  license.  A  formal  letter,  however,  has  not  yet  been  filed  with  the  Federal 
Power  Commission  so  advising.  The  failure  to  file  such  letter  is  holding  up  action 
by  the  Federal  Power  Commission. 

Shortly  after  March  15,  1922,  a  purported  interview  with  Arthur  P.  Davis,  chief  of 
the  Government  Reclamation  Service,  appeared  in  certain  Los  Angeles  papers,  to 
the  effect  that  the  construction  of  the  Girand  project  would  kill  the  proposed  Govern- 
ment construction  at  Boulder  Canyon,  which  Mr.  Davis  has  so  strongly  urged.  The 
reason  given  was  that  the  (iirand  project  would  sell  power  to  the  prospective  customers 
of  the  Government,  should  it  eventually  build  at  Boulder  Canyon;  Boulder  Canyon 
is  situated  on  the  river  touching  Nevada.  There  has  never  been  any  claim  that  from 
an  engineering  or  physical  standpoint  the  Girand  project  would  interfere  with  the 
Boulder  Canyon  project.  On  the  contrary,  it  would  be  helpful.  The  Girand  project 
would,  from  an  engineering  and  physical  standpoint,  be  helpful  in  at  leant  two  ways. 
It  would  regulate  the  flow  of  the  river,  and  could  furnish  power  to  Boulder  Canyon 
during  its  construction  period.  Now.  forgetting  for  the  moment  lhal  Girand.  under 
the  law  and  his  preliminary  permit,  is  legally  entitled  to  a  license  now.  is  ihe  position 
taken  by  Mr.  Davis,  either  fair  or  sound?  Should  a  man  who  has  proceeded  in  good 
faith:  who  has  given  years  of  his  life  and  a  large  sum  of  money  in  acquiring  and  pre- 
serving certain  water-power  rights,  be  deprived  of  those  rights  arbitrarily  and  without 
legal  reason  or  justification?  Should  he  be  denied  that  to  which  he  'is  legally  and 
morally  entitled,  for  the  reason,  as  Mr.  Davis  advances,  that  he  might  be  a  power 
competitor  of  the  Government?  It  has  not  been  determined  that  a  dam  can  be  built 
at  Boulder  Canyon.  It  has  not  been  determined  that  Congress  will  appropriate 
money  for  such  construction.  But  assuming  both  facts,  are  they  sufficient  reason  for 
denying  to  Girand  the  legal  rights  he  has  been  assured  were  his?  In  ihe  lirst  place, 
it  is  Girand  who  should  be  most  fearful  of  competition  with  the  Government. 


172  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

If  the  theory  of  public  ownership  adherents  is  correct,  the  Government  utility  can 
always  undersell  the  privately  conducted  utility.  Girand  would  be  required  to  pay 
State  and  Federal  taxes,  amounting  annually  to  hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars.  He 
would  pay  an  annual  fixed  fee  to  the  Federal  Power  Commission.  It  would  seem  that 
not  the  Government,  but  Girand,  should  fear  competition.  But  if  the  danger  lies 
in  Girand  taking  the  market  away  from  the  Government  before  Boulder  Canyon  is 
constructed,  then  all  applications  for  licenses  now  pending  before  the  Federal  Power 
Commission,  covering  projects  in  Southern  California,  should  likewise  be  denied,  for 
the  reason  that  such  projects,  if  developed,  would  be  brought  into  competition  with 
the  Government.  The  unfairness  of  such  a  position,  aside  from  Girand 's  vested 
rights,  is  obvious.  Girand  has  no  objection  to  construction  at  Boulder  Canyon.  He 
is  in  favor  of  any  construction  there  or  elsewhere  that  will  be  helpful  to  flood  control 
and  reclamation.  It  is  quite  probable  that  many  years  will  elapse  before  Congress 
will  appropriate  the  necessary  money  or  construction  will  begin  at  Boulder  Canyon. 
Arizona  can  not  wait.  Arizona  wants  the  Girand  license  issued  now. 

SWING-JOHNSON   BILL. 

A  bill  was  recently  introduced  in  the  House  and  Senate  known  as  the  Swing-Johnson 
bill.  It.  proposes  an  appropriation  of  $70,000.000  for  the  construction  at  Boulder 
Canyon,  together  with  certain  canals .  But  the  bill  further  provides  that  the  GoA'ern- 
ment  shall  reserve  to  itself  the  exclusive  right  to  construct,  provide  and  control  dams, 
reservoirs  or  diversion  works  on  the  Colorado  River  below  the  mouth  of  the  Green 
River.  As  the  Green  River  is  north  of  Arizona  in  Utah,  this  would  mean  that  if 
Arizona  is  ever  to  obtain  any  benefits  from  the  Colorado  River,  through  development 
of  power  or  otherwise,  she  must  depend  solely  upon  the  Government  to  provide  same. 
In  other  words,  this  bill  proposes  that  never  at  any  time,  or  at  any  place  within  the 
State  of  Arizona,  can  any  private  utility  company  develop  power  on  the  Colorado 
River.  Just  why  the  States  of  Utah,  Colorado,  Wyoming,  and  other  States  to  the 
north,  should  be  left  free  to  obtain  any  power  development  or  other  beneficial  con- 
struction on  the  Colorado  River  and  Arizona  be  denied  the  same  right,  is  not  clear. 
Obviously  the  discrimination  is  unfair.  From  the  Arizona  viewpoint  competition  is 
to  be  desired.  Arizona  interests  will  best  be  served  through  competition,  rather 
than  through  a  monopoly  of  the  river  by  either  the  Government  or  private  capital. 

Arizona  does  not  propose  to  he  deprived  of  any  of  its  rights  in  or  to  the  Colorado 
River.  The  Swing-Johnson  bill  discriminates  against  Arizona.  Arizona  is  in  favor 
of  Government  construction  at  Boulder  or  Glen  Canyon,  but  it  is  also  in  favor  of 
private  utility  construction.  The  Girand  project  is  ready  to  proceed.  It  will  in- 
crease the  taxable  wealth  of  Arizona  about  $40,000,000  and  mean  hundreds  of  thou- 
sands of  dollars  annually  in  taxes  to  the  State  and  county.  Government  construction 
will  mean  nothing  in  taxes.  The  Girand  project  will  provide  employment  within 
the  reasonably  immediate  future  to  many  people.  There  is  no  assurance  that  the 
Government  will  ever  construct  at  Boulder  Canyon,  or,  if  so,  for  years.  The  Girand 
means  immediate  power  for  Arizona  interests.  There  is  no  legal  or  logical  reason  for 
delayin^  the  issuance  of  the  Girand  license.  Arizona  asks  that  it  be  issued  at  once. 

MAY  18,  1922. 

TENTATIVE  PLAN  FOR  THE  CONSTRUCTION  OF  A  789-FooT  ROCK-FILL  DAM  ON  THE 
COLORADO  RIVER  AT  LEE  FERRY,  ARIZ. 

[By  E.  C.  La  Rue,  Hydraulic  Engineer,  U.  S.  Geological  Survey.] 
SYNOPSIS. 

It  is  proposed  to  build  a  rock-fill  dam  in  a  narrow  canyon  of  the  Colorado  River  by 
blasting  in  the  canyon  walls.  The  dam  described  in  this  paper  was  designed  to  raise 
the  water  700  feet  above  the  bed  of  the  river.  Both  the  height  of  the  dam  and  the 
plan  suggested  for  its  construction  are  unique  features.  The  walls  of  the  canyon  rise 
1,300  feet  above  the  river,  and  the  width  of  the  canyon  at  the  water  surface  is  450  feet. 

During  the  past  six  years  the  writer  had  has  in  mind  the  plan  herein  outlined  for 
the  construction  of  such  a  dam.  As  a  dam  of  this  type  may  be  built  on  the  Lower 
Colorado  within  the  next  year  or  two,  it  is  believed  that  the  presentation  of  this  paper 
at  this  time  will  be  of  interest  to  many  engineers.  There  may  be  a  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  the  feasibilitv  of  the  plan  as  presented.  Some  engineers  may  have 
studied  this  problem  carefully,  but  to  the  writer's  knowledge  no  one  has  ever  made 
the  results  of  his  studies  available  to  the  engineering  profession.  It  is  hoped  that 
engineers  will  present  their  views  in  the  form  of  constructive  criticism  of  this  paper. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF  LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 


173 


INTRODUCTION. 

In  the  southwestern  part  of  the  United  States  the  demand  for  power  is  increasing 
rapidly.  In  California  alone  construction  plans  which  call  for  the  expenditure  of 
several  hundred  million  dollars  have  been  adopted  for  the  development  of  hydro- 
electric power.  As  a  result  of  these  plans  the  ultimate  development  of  the  power 
resources  of  the  Sierra  Nevada  and  Coast  Range  Mountains,  in  the  southern  part  of 
California,  is  in  sight. 

The  construction  of  high  rock-fill  dams  by  blasting  down  the  towering  canyon 
walls  has  been  suggested  in  connection  with  the  studies  of  both  power  and  irrigation 
development.  This  paper  deals  primarily  with  the  practicability  of  constructing 
such  a  dam  in  the  Colorado  River.  A  particular  site  (Lee  Ferry)  has  been  chosen 
in  order  that  the  discussion  might  be  based  on  definite  dimensions.  It  should  not 
be  construed,  however,  as  advocating  this  or  any  other  specific  project. 

COLORADO   RIVER    BASIN. 

General  features. — The  Colorado  River  is  formed  by  the  junction  of  the  Green  and 
Grand  Rivers  in  southeastern  Utah.  The  combined  length  of  the  Green  and  the 
Colorado  is  1,700  miles  and  the  total  fall  is  about  14,000  feet. 

The  Colorado  River  and  its  tributaries  drain  an  area  of  244,000  square  miles.  This 
area  comprises  the  southweastern  part  of  Wyoming,  the  eastern  half  of  Utah,  the 
western  part  of  Colorado,  practically  all  of  Arizona,  and  small  parts  of  California, 
Nevada,  New  Mexico,  and  Mexico. 

The  water  resources  of  the  Colorado  River  Basin  are  enormous.  About  14,000,000 
acre-feet  of  water  is  wasted  annually  into  the  Gulf  of  California.  Practically  all  this 
water  could  be  used  for  irrigation  and,  in  addition,  a  large  amount  of  hydroelectric 
power  could  be  developed.  In  order  to  utilize  fully  the  water  resources  of  the  Colorado 
River  Basin  the  flow  must  be  regulated  to  meet  the  demands  for  both  irrigation  and 
power.  The  storage  of  the  flood  waters  would  serve  a  threefold  purpose:  Water  would 
be  available  for  irrigation  when  needed;  the  possibilities  for  the  development  of 
hydroelectric  power  would  be  greatly  increased;  and  with  the  ravaging  floods  under 
control  property  on  the  lower  river,  exceeding  §100,000,000  in  value,  would  be  safe. 

Storage-reservoir  sites. — A  comprehensive  plan  for  the  development  of  the  water 
resources  of  the  Colorado  River  Basin  will  undoubtedly  call  for  the  utilization  of 
most  of  the  reservoir  sites  mentioned  in  Table  1 . 

TABLE  1. — Storage-reservoir  sites  in  the  Colorado  River  Basin. 


Name. 

Stream. 

Height  of 
dam, 
In  feet.' 

Capacity, 
in 
acre-feet. 

Flaming  Gorge  
Junipor  Canyon  
Ourav 

Green  River,  Utah-Wyo  
Yampa  River,  Colo  

255 
200 
300 

4,  720,  000 
1,400,000 
28  000  000 

KremmliDg 

Grand  River.  Colo                                         .  . 

230 

2  200  000 

Howey  
Green-Grand  

Grand  Kiver,  Utah  

.Junction  of  Green  and  Grand  Kivers,  Utah  

213 

270 

2,  .100,  000 
8,  600,  000 

Blufl 

San  .1  nun  River,  Utah   

264 

2  600  000 

Lee  Forrv 

Colorado  and  San  Juan  It  Ivors,  Utah-  Vriz. 

700 

-  50  000  000 

Boulder  Canvon 

Colorado  River,  Nev.-  Ariz  

600 

31,600  000 

'  The  figures  in  this  column  indicate  the  elevation  of  spillway  above  river  bed. 

••!  Ksiimalo.l. 

These  storage  sites  and  their  use  were  discussed  in  the  writer's  report  on  the  "Colo- 
River  and  its  utilization."  (Water  Supply  Paper  No.  :<!);">.  l'nit«'d  Suites  <  ieological 
Survey,  191(5.)  An  analysis  was  made  of  the  records  of  stream  (low,  and  the  mass 
curves  indicated  that  the  flow  of  the  Lower  Colorado  could  be  equalized  if  properly 
located  reservoir  sites  having  an  aggregate  storage  capacity  of  25,000,000  acre-feet 
were  utilized.  This  study  also  indicated  that,  if  no  allowance  is  made  for  evapora- 
tion from  the  surface  of  these  reservoirs,  a  uniform  flow  of  21,800  second-feet  could  be 
maintained  below  the  San  Juan  River.  The  irrigation  of  additional  lands  in  the 
upper  basin  would  further  reduce  the  quantity  for  the  uniform  flow  that  might  be 
maintained  by  storage. 

Undeveloped  iratcr  /)o»r/-  hi'turen  Green  River  and  Roulder  Camion. — In  the  (i7()  miles 
between  the  town  of  (Jreen  Kiver.  Utah,  and  Boulder  Canyon,  Nev.-Ariz.,  the  fall  is 
about  3,350  feet.  As  this  part  of  the  Colorado  and  that  part  of  (irand  River  below 
the  elevation  of  th  e  town  of  Green  River  are  in  practically  a  continuous  canyon,  the 


174      DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLOEADO  RIVER  BASIX. 

use  of  the  water  for  irrigation  v  ithin  tin's  stretch  is  impossible,  but  conditions  are 
favorable  for  the  regulation  of  flo  :id  for  the  development  of  power. 

The  entire  regulated  :'o«-  might  prof tably  be  used  for  the  irrigation  of  extensive  areas 
of  arable  land  «'tu;ited  belo"-  Boulder  ('an von. 

The  data  now  available  indir-ate  that  the  water-power  r<  :  the  070  miles  of 

the  river  between  Green  River  and  Boulder  (  anyon  may  be  utilized  by  developing 
five  projects. 

Orecn-^nrnd  projer'. — A  170-foot  dam  built  on  the  Colorado  River  immediately 
below  the  mouth  of  <  K-en  River  would  make  possible  the  development  of  J10>000 
horsepower.  The  capacitv  of  this  pr(>re<-T  for  power  ma--  be  L'n-atly  Li  hen 

the  flow  of  the  Green  and  C^rand  Pi  dated  by  addii  i  pper 

basin  of  these  str> 

Lrc  Ferrti  project. — BY  building  a  dam  at  I.ee  Ferry  to  raise  the  water  700  feet 
1, COO. COO  horsepower  may  re  develc 

fe  Canyon  proj.Tt. — A  spuming  that  the  f  r  •  ;  -  er  is  regulated  by  storage 

above,  it  mav  prove  feasible  to  develop  norsepower  between  Lee  Ferry  and 

the  ^  estern  boundary  of  the  Grand  Canvon  National  Park. 

ff-t. — Between  the  western  boundary  of  the  Grand   Canv..n 

vational  Park  and  Diamond  Creek  the  Colorado  River  falls  oOO  feet.     This  part  of  the 
river  may  be  developed  by  building  two  dams,  each  dam  to  raise  the  water  250  feet. 
The  capacity  of  this  project  would  be  830,000  horsepower  if  the  flow  of  the  ri\ 
regulated  by  storage  above. 

BouMfr  <  :med  that  at  Boulder  Canyon  the  flow  will  be 

reregulated  to  meet  the  demand  for  water  lor  irrigation.     Under  this  condition  a 
dam  550  feet  high  will  make  possible  the  development  oi"  700,000  horsepov. er. 

More  than  4.000. GOO  continuous  horsepower  may  be  developed  between  Gieen  River 
and  Boulder  Canvon.  The  aggregate  installed  capacity  of  the  power  plants  would 
probably  be  more  than  5,000,000  horsepower. 

THE    LEE    FERRY   PROJECT. 

Eight  miles  above  I  ee  Ferry,  Ariz.,  is  a  site  which  has  been  selected  as  particularly 
favorable  for  both  the  regulation  of  flow  and  the  development  of  power,  the  possibilities 
of  which  vill  be  disclosed  by  the  surveys  and  investigations  now  in  pr<x 

Present  information  indicates  that  to  construct  a  780-foot  dam  at  the  Lee  Ferry 
site  may  prove  feasible.  A  dam  of  this  height  would  form  a  reservoir  with  a  capacity 
of  about  50,000.000  acre-feet.  The  maximum  back  water  would  extend  upstream 
nearly  to  the  junction  of  the  Green  and  Grand  Rivers  and  to  within  230  feet  of  the 
elevation  of  the  piers  of  the  railroad  bridge  near  Green  River.  Utah. 

The  capacity  of  the  upper  100  feet  of  the  Lee  Ferry  Reservoir  would  be  about 
20,000.000  acre-feet.  Allowing  for  evaporation  from  the  reservoirs  and  for  the  use  of 
water  in  the  upper  basin  for  the  irrigation  of  additional  lands,  the  20.000,000  acre- 
feet  of  storage  capacity  may  be  sufficient  to  equalize  the  flow  through  the  canyons 
of  the  lower  river.  With  a*  100-foot  drawdown,  the  average  head  available  at  Lee 
Ferry  for  power  would  be  about  650  feet,  and  with  the  flow  of  the  river  equalized  at 
this  point,  power  plants  in  the  canyon  below  could  be  operated  under  heads  almost 
equal  to  the  full  height  of  the  respective  dams.  The  dam  farthest  downstream,  how- 
ever, should  provide  sufficient  storage  capacity  to  regulate  the  flow  to  conform  to  the 
demand  for  irrigation.  Under  these  conditions,  it  seems  probable  that  an  aggregate 
effective  head  of  2.800  feet  may  be  utilized  out  of  the  3,350  feet  of  fall  between  Green 
River.  Utah,  and  Boulder  Canyon. 

The  mean  annual  flow  at  Lee  Ferry  has  been  about  15.000.000  acre-feet,  but  allowing 
for  the  reduction  in  flow  for  ultimate  irrigation  development  in  the  upper  basin, 
this  quantity  may  be  reduced  to  10.000.000  acre-feet.  It  may  be  50  years  before 
ultimate  irrigation  development  in  the  upper  basin  is  reached.  To  assume  that  a 
uniform  flow  of  about  19.300  second-feet  can  be  maintained  at  the  Lee  Ferry  site 
and  in  the  canyons  below  would  seem  reasonable. 

The  depth  to  bedrock  at  the  dam  site  has  not  been  determined,  but  the  writer 
believes  that  rock  is  near  the  surface  in  the  river  channel.  When  he  examined  this 
part  of  the  river  in  August.  1915.  the  river  was  at  a  very  low  stage,  and  downstream, 
about  8  miles  from  the  Lee  Ferry  Dam  site,  the  bedrock  appeared  to  extend  across 
the  channel  of  the  Colorado  River  at  the  surface. 

At  the  dam  site  the  red  sandstone  walls  of  the  canyon  rise  1,300  feet  above  the  river, 
and  the  width  of  the  canyon  at  the  water  surf  act  is  450  feet.  The  course  of  the  river 
at  this  point  is  in  the  form  of  the  letter  s>  thus  making  two  spillway  sites  available. 
By  constructing  tunnels  through  Jhe  bluff,  the  water  may  be  carried  about  3.000  feet 
to  a  forebay  and  power  house  which  is  6  miles  by  river  from  the  dam  site.  The  site 
is  easily  accessible  by  automobile  and  a  railroad  could  be  built  at  a  comparatively 
low  cost,  connecting  with  the  nearest  railroad  point.  Flagstaff.  Ariz..  133  miles  to  the 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BAS1X.  175 

south.  After  considering  the  conditions  at  the  dam  site,  the  facilities  for  spillways, 
site  for  power  house  and  auxiliary  structures,  storage  capacity  above  the  dam.  and 
the  accessibility  of  the  project,  the  writer  believes  the  Lee  Ferry  site  to  be  one  of 
tli"  most  promising  on  the  Colorado  River  below  the  junction  of  the  Green  and  Grand 
Rivers. 

Should  this  project  be  developed,  water  would  be  available  for  irrigation  on  the 
lower  river  for  at  least  a  generation  to  come,  and  the  menace  from  floods  would  be 
removed  (except  floods  from  the  Gila  River) . 

The  conditions  favor  the  construction  of  a  780-foot  dam  of  the  rock-fill  type.  Al- 
though such  a  high  rock-till  dam  has  never  been  constructed,  the  writer  believes  that 
one  can  be  built  at  this  site  and  made  practically  water-tight  at  a  much  less  cost  than 
any  other  type  of  dam. 

']',  nt(iti;<  design  for  rock-fill  flam. — In  designing  a  rock-fill  dam  for  the  Lee  Ferry 
site  a  slope  of  3:1  was  used  for  the  upstream  face,  for  the  downstream  face  6:1  was  used 
to  the  300-foot  level,  and  4:1  for  the  remainder.  The  rock  for  the  dam  can  be  blasted 
from  the  canyon  walls.  With  this  plan  of  construction  the  slopes  of  the  finished  dam 
would  be  uneven.  but  the  writer  believes  that  the  general  slope  of  both  faces  of  the 
finished  dam  should  not  be  greater  than  those  mentioned. 

It  is  assumed  that  lied  rock  lies  at  a  depth  of  100  feet  below  the  bed  of  the  river,  that 
the  channel  is  iilled  Avith  line  sand  and  silt  to  a  depth  of  60  feet,  and  that  the  next  40 
feet  is  composed  of  sand  and  bowlders.  If  the  canyon  walls  were  blasted  into  the 
river,  the  heavy  mass  of  material  would  settle  to  the  level  of  the  bowlders  assumed  to 
be  60  feet  below  the  bed  of  the  river,  and  some  of  the  fine  sand  and  silt  would  be  forced 
up.  Under  these  conditions  the  finished  dam  would  contain  50,000,000  cubic  yards 
of  material.  The  center  50-foot  section  of  the  dam  would  contain  about  1,000,000 
cubic  yards. 

Prior  to  construction  the  outline  for  the  dam  could  be  plainly  marked  on  the  canyon 
walls.  A  plan  for  mining  both  walls  of  the  canyon  could  be  worked  out  from  detailed 
topography  of  the  site  of  the  dam.  To  obtain  500,000  cubic  yards  of  rock  from  each 
wall  for  the  center  50-foot  section  of  the  dam,  it  would  be  necessary  to  blast  the  wails 
back  on  a  slope  slightly  steeper  than  2:1,  and  here  it  may  be  necessary  to  rehandle 
some  of  the  material.  Up  and  down  stream  from  the  center  50-foot  section  of  the  dam 
the  walls  of  the  canyon  may  be  blasted  from  a  lower  level,  and  the  required  quantity 
of  material  obtained  by  blasting  back  on  a  much  steeper  slope.  The  space  occupied 
by  the  loose  rock  in  the  dam  will  be  about  15  per  cent  greater  than  the  space  occupied 
by  the  same  material  in  its  natural  compact  state.  If  the  mines  are  propeily  placed 
in  both  walls  of  the  canyon  the  first  shot  will  blow  enough  rock  into  the  river  to  form 
a  dam  250  feet  high,  having  a  gradual  slope  to  the  lower  toe,  more  than  a  mile  down- 
stream. 

The  discharge  of  the  river  may  be  expected  to  range  from  4,000  to  10,000  second-feet 
during  the  eight  months  following  the  flood  period.  Perhaps  50  per  cent  of  the  ma- 
terial in  the  dam  would  consist  of  rock  weighing  from  1  ton  to  1,000  tons.  If  the  un- 
expected should  happen,  and  a  flood  of  100,000  second-feet  should  pass  over  the  un- 
finished dam,  some  of  the  material  might  be  moved  downstream.  The  unfinished 
dam  would  have  a  slope  of  about  5  per  cent  and  the  bed  over  which  the  flood  would 
pass  would  be  rough.  Under  these  conditions  the  water,  8  feet  in  depth,  might 
attain  a  velocity  of  30  feet  per  second.  Since  weight  of  bodies  that  can  be  moved  by 
a  current  varies  as  the  sixth  power  of  the  velocity,  such  a  flood  would  have  an  enor- 
mous ability  for  destmction.  The  lighter  materials  would  be  carried  downstream 
and  rock  that  could  withstand  the  force  of  the  water  would  settle.  However,  floods 
which  occur  outside  the  normal  flood  period  last  only  a  few  days.  To  believe  that 
after  the  flood  the  unfinished  dam  would  retain  a  height  of  100  feet  or  more  above  the 
average  low  water  level  seems  more  reasonable  than  that  all  of  it  would  be  carried 
away.  Such  a  flood  might  prove  to  be  a  blessing  in  disguise,  since  that  part  of  the 
dam  remaining  would  form  a  solid  foundation  on  which  to  build  the  superstructure. 

However,  flood  water  should  not  be  permitted  to  flow  over  the  dam,  and  it  is  sug- 
gested that  no  material  be  blasted  into  the  river  until  a  temporary  spillway  has  been 
provided  200  feet  above  the  bed  of  the  river.  A  spillway  tunnel  would  be  about 
3,000  feet  long  and  could  be  given  a  fall  of  200  feet.  A  spillway  tunnel,  30  feet  in 
diameter,  with  a  properly  designed  entrance,  would  have  approximately  the  follow- 
ing capacity: 


Elevation  of  water  above  Capacity,  in 

gate  sill,  in  feet:  second-feet. 

0 0 

10 5,000 

20 13,500 


Elevation  of  water  above 
gate  sill,  in  feet: 

60 38,200 

70 42,000 

80...  .  45,000 


30 22,500   !  90 47,400 

40 28,500   j  100 50.000 

50 33,700 


170  DEVELOPMENT    OF   LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER   BASIX. 

With  the  spillway  completed  and  the  flood  stage  passed,  the  mines  may  be  dis- 
charged and  about.  20,000,000  cubic  yards  of  rock  would  be  blown  into  the  river. 
This  mass  of  loose  rock  would  not  be  water-tight,  which  feature  is  the  most  uncertain 
in  the  plan  here  presented. 

This  mass  of  rock,  weighing  about  40,000,000  tons,  would  displace  the  fine  sand  and 
silt  and  would  tend  to  form  a  mud  bank  immediately  upstream  from  the  dam.  Such 
a  mud  bank  would  be  practically  water-tight  and,  until  overtopped,  it  would  cut  off 
the  flow  of  the  river.  This  material  might  make  the  rock  fill  water-tight  to  an  eleva- 
tion of  50  to  100  feet  above  the  bed  of  the  river,  and  thus  form  a  reservoir  having  a 
storage  capacity  of  from  100,000  to  700,000  acre-feet.  If  the  flow  of  the  river  was 
5,000  second-feet,  the  supply  of  water  for  irrigation  might  be  cut  off  for  a  period  of 
from  10  to  70  days. 

Water  for  the  irrigation  of  more  than  400,000  acres  of  land  on  the  Lower  Colorado 
must  be  available  each  month  of  the  year.  To  cut  off  the  supply  of  water  for  the 
irrigation  of  these  lands,  even  for  a  10-day  period,  might  result  in  serious  damage  to 
crops.  An  understanding  should  be  had  with  the  irrigation  interests  in  order  that  they 
mav  take  proper  steps  to  protect  the  crops,  should  the  supply  of  water  lie  cut  off. 

Therefore,  unless  a  temporary  spillway  is  provided  at  an  elevation  of  50  feet  above 
low  water,  it  will  be  necessary  to  discharge  the  mines  when  the  river  is  in  flood  so 
that  the  storage  reservoir  above  the  dam  may  be  quickly  filled,  and  permit  the 
water  to  flow  either  through  the  upper  part  of  the  unfinished  dam  or  through  a  tem- 
porary spillway  located  at  the  200-foot  level.  The  writer  believes  that  the  temporary 
spillway  should  be  located  at  the  200-foot  level  and  that  the  mines  should  be  dis- 
charged after  the  peak  of  the  summer  flood,  when  the  discharge  has  fallen  to  about 
50.000  second-feet.  This  feature  of  the  project  deserves  consideration,  and  a  thorough 
study  of  the  stream-flow  records  should  be  made  to  determine  the  proper  time  for 
the  first  discharge  of  the  mines. 

Practically  all  the  rock  fill  can  be  blasted  into  place,  thus  making  it  unnecessary 
to  rehandle  the  material  except  for  finishing  a  small  section  at  the  top  of  the  dam. 
The  50.000,000  cubic  yards  of  rock  could  probably  be  blasted  into  pi.  -i  <>f 

10  cents  or  less  per  cubic  yard.  To  determine  the  quantity  of  fine  material  necessary 
to  make  the  rock  fill  water-tight  would  be  difficult,  hut  the  writer  believes  that 
about  10.000.000  cubic  yards  of  fine  rock,  sand,  and  silt  would  be  required. 

The  upper  face  of  the  dam  would  be  permanently  submerged  to  the  600-foot 
level,  and.  therefore,  below  this  level  no  protection  against  wave  action  is  necessary. 
The  water  in  the  reservoir  would  fluctuate  between  the  600  and  700  foot  levels.  The 
reservoir  would  be  located  in  a  deep  box  canyon  the  circuitous  course  of  which  would 
prevent  excessive  wave  action.  On  the  upper  face  of  the  dam.  above  the  600-foot 
level,  rock  2  feet  in  diameter  should  probably  be  placed.  This  section  will  be  wet 
and  dry  periodically  and  will  require  care  in  its  construction  if  the  back  fill  is  to 
be  kept  water-tight. 

Making  the  rock  fill  water-tight. — Several  methods  have  been  used  in  the  past  to 
make  rock-fill  dams  water-tight,  but  most  of  these  methods  appear  unsatisfactory 
when  applied  to  such  a  high  dam. 

A  concrete  core  wall  extending  to  bedrock  is  often  used.  If  this  plan  were  adopted 
at  the  Lee  Ferry  Dam  site,  it  would  be  necessary  to  excavate  the  river  channel  to 
bedrock.  To  take  care  of  the  flood  water  during  the  period  when  the  core  wall  is 
being  built  from  bedrock  to  the  former  water  surface  would  be  both  hazardous  and 
expensive.  For  such  a  high  dam  there  would  be  danger  of  the  core  wall  becoming 
fractured  on  account  of  uneven  forces  being  exerted  by  the  rock  fill. 

A  steel  core,  having  a  concrete  base,  would  be  even  more  objectionable  than  a  con- 
crete core,  for  besides  requiring  a  concrete  facing  to  prolong  its  life,  it  would  have 
all  the  objectionable  features  of  the  concrete  core. 

The  rock  fill  might  be  made  water-tight  by  lining  the  upstream  face  of  the  dam 
with  concrete,  but  it  would  be  necessary  either  to  carry  this  concrete  faring  to  bed- 
rock or  to  provide  an  impervious  base  for  the  dam  with  a  series  of  cut-off  walls. 
Otherwise,  the  water  would  pass  under  the  concrete  facing  and  undermine  the  dam. 
In  addition  to  these  odjectionable  features,  the  settlement  of  the  rock  fill  would 
make  it  almost  impossible  to  prevent  the  concrete  facing  from  becoming  fractured. 

The  writer  believes  that  with  the  river  under  control  the  rock  fill  can  be  made 
water-tisrht  by  sluicing  fine  material  into  the  dam. 

The  discharge  of  the  river  ranges  from  4.000  to  10.000  second-feet  after  the  flood 
period.  This  quantity  of  water  might  find  its  way  through  the  rock  till.  At  this 
stage  of  construction  every  attention  should  be  given  to  the  work  of  making  the 
rock  fill  water-tight.  It  would  be  necessary  to  place  fine  material  on  the  upper  face 
and  perhaps  as  far  down  stream  as  the  center  of  the  finished  dam.  This  material 
should  be  graded  in  size  from  that  which  would  pass  through  a  1-inch  to  a  6-inch 
mesh.  On  the  right  bank  of  the  river,  a  few  hundred  feet  upstream  from  the  upper 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLOEADO   RIVER  BASIN.  177 

toe  of  the  dam.  there  is  a  talus  which  could  be  moved  to  the  dam  at  a  low  cost.  The 
back  water  above  the  dam  might  have  a  depth  of  from  75  to  100  feet  and  would  extend 
up  the  river  a  distance  of  at  least  25  miles. 

Assuming  that  the  rock  rill  rises  250  feet  above  the  bed  of  the  river,  and  that  there 
is  100  feet  of  water  above  the  dam,  the  flow  of  water  through  the  dam  would  be  as 
follows:  The  water  would  rush  through  the  open  spaces  between  the  large  rocks. 
flow  through  the  spaces  between  the  smaller  rocks,  percolate  through  the  sand,  and 
seep  through  the  clay  or  fine  silt.  The  rush  of  water  through  the  spaces  between 
the  large  rocks  would  be  partly  stopped  by  the  coarser  material — that  is.  the  rock 
(i  inches  in  diameter;  and  the  flow  through  the  spaces  between  the  smaller  rocks 
would  be  partly  stopped  by  the  finer  material  that  is,  rock  that  would  pass  the  1, 
2.  3,  or  4  inch  mesh.  Large  quantities  of  sand  may  then  be  deposited  on  the  upper 
face  of  the  dam.  Due  to  the  flow  of  water  under  high  pressure,  this  sand  would 
be  carried  into  the  dam.  The  deposit  of  fine  clay  or  silt  on  the  upstream  face  and 
on  top  of  the  dam  should  produce  a  practically  water-tight  structure.  Owing  to 
the  enormous  pressure,  water  would  always  seep  through  the  dam  but  probably 
not  in  quantities  sufficient  to  cause  erosion. 

When,  in  1915.  the  writer  made  a  trip  by  boat  through  150  miles  of  the  canyon 
of  the  Colorado  River  between  Hite,  Utah,  and  Lee  Ferry,  Ariz.,  large  silt  deposits 
at  the  mouth  of  Xavajo  Creek  were  observed.  This  creek  joins  the  Colorado  from 
the  south,  at  a  point  about  18  miles  upstream  from  the  site  of  the  Lee  Ferry  Dam. 
Large  silt  deposits  also  were  observed  at  many  other  points  in  the  canyon  below 
the  mouth  of  San  Juan  River.  These  deposits  could  be  located  before  they  are  cov- 
ered with  the  back  water,  and  as  the  water  reached  the  respective  deposits,  the 
material  could  be  loaded  on  barges  by  dipper  or  suction  dredges.  It  might  prove 
more  economical,  however,  to  place  rock  crushers  on  the  plateau  above  the  dam 
and  transport  the  crushed  material  to  the  dam  by  chutes.  It  is  thus  seen  that  there 
is  plenty  of  accessible  material  for  use  in  the  final  process  of  making  the  rock  fill 
water-tight. 

When  the  rock  fill  becomes  water-tight  and  the  reservoir  fills,  the  water  may  per- 
colate through  the  40-foot  layer  of  sand  and  bowlders.  This  water  would  be  forced 
to  travel  a  distance  of  about  5,700  feet.  The  indicated  hydraulic  gradient  is  about 
1:8,  and  the  .writer  believes  that  the  frictional  resistance  to  the  passage  of  water 
through  the  40-foot  layer  of  sand  and  bowlders  would  be  sufficient  to  consume  the 
head  of  700  feet  before  the  lower  toe  of  the  dam  is  reached,  in  which  case  the  velocity 
of  the  percolating  water  near  the  lower  toe  of  the  dam  would  not  erode  the  founda- 
tion. Under  these  conditions  the  dam  as  designed  would  be  safe  against  blowouts 
caused  by  the  upward  hydrostatic  pressure  of  the  percolating  water  on  the  base  of 
the  dam. 

It  is  said  that  the  silt-laden  waters  of  the  Colorado  would  be  sufficient  to  tighten  the 
dam.  This  silt,  however,  would  be  deposited  at  the  head  of  the  back  water  and  not 
at  the  dam,  which  condition  favors  the  completed  project.  With  reservoir  full,  the 
back  water  would  extend  up  every  side  canyon  and  tributary  of  the  Colorado,  and 
would  probably  extend  up  the  San  Juan  River,  a  distance  of  80  miles  or  more. 
The  San  Juan,  which  carries  a  large  quantity  of  silt,  would  have  its  own  stilling  basin 
and.  perhaps,  100  years  would  pass  before  the  silt  would  reach  the  canyon  of  the 
Colorado.  As  each  side  canyon  would  have  its  own  stilling  basin,  the  water  in  the 
main  canyon  of  the  Colorado  above  the  dam  would  remain  practically  clear.  This  is 
important  when  it  is  considered  that  the  water  is  to  be  used  for  the  development  of 
power. 

Since  it  is  proposed  to  blast  about  20.000,000  cubic  yards  of  rock  into  the  river 
channel  wiih  the  lirst  discharge  of  the  mines,  arch  action  may  result  when  this  enor- 
mous quantity  of  material  falls  into  the  canyon,  thus  leaving  a  large  open  space 
within  the  proposed  dam.  Although  such  arch  action  is  only  a  remote  possibility,  it 
might  be  advisable  to  discharge  the  mines  in  both  walls  of  the  canyon  at  the  same 
instant,  so  that  much  of  the  material  may  meet  over  the  river  channel  and  fall  ver- 
tically. Perhaps  better  results  can  he  obtained  by  discharging  the  mines  in  one  wall, 
after  those  in  the  other  wall,  but  the  writer  believes  it  is  impossible  to  determine  just 
how  the  roc'k  will  fall  when  the  mines  are  discharged. 

Care  of  inili-r  //urini/  ctitixtrdction.—The  writer  I, Sieves  it  imm-fessary  to  have  the 
river  under  control  until  the  dam  is  raised  to  an  elevation  250  feet  or  more  above  the 
bed  of  the  river.  If  the  mines  were  discharged  immediately  after  the  flood  period  has 
passed,  at  least  eight  months  would  elapse  under  normal  conditions  before  the  river 
would  again  be  at  flood  stage.  During  these  eight  months,  it  is  expected  that  the 
upper  face  of  the  dam  can  be  raised  100  feet,  or  to  an  elevation  of  350  feet  above  the 
bed  of  the  river.  The  storage  capacity  of  the  reservoir  between  an  elevation  of  200 
and  350  feet  is  about  8,000,000  acre-feet. 


178  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

The  writer  has  described  (Engineering  News-Record.  March  6.  1919)  the  flood  of 
1917.  during  which  the  peak  at  Lee  Ferry  was  about  147.000  second-feet,  one  of  the 
highest  floods  of  record  originating  above  that  site.  An  analysis  of  the  records  of 
daily  discharge  for  this  flood  period  shows  that  the  water  level  in  the  Lee  Ferry 
Reservoir  would  have  been  raised  from  an  elevation  of  215  feet  to  an  elevation  of 
332  feet  above  the  bed  of  the  river.  The  accumulated  storage  above  the  200-foot  level 
would  have  been  about  7.300  000  acre-feet  and  the  total  volume  discharged  through 
the  temporary  spillway  would  have  been  nearly  7.500.000  acre-feet.  It  is  seen, 
therefore,  that  in  order  to  prevent  such  a  flood  overtopping  the  unfinished  dam.  it 
would  have  been  necessary  to  raise  the  dam  at  least  332  feet  above  the  bed  of  the 
river.  For  the  plan  of  construction  herein  presented  the  writer  believes  that  the  most 
dangerous  period  would  be  that  during  which  the  dam  is  being  raised  from  the  200 
to  350  foot  level.  Luring  this  period,  it  may  be  necessary  to  take  care  of  a  summer 
flood  such  as  that  which  occurred  in  1917. 

The  water  level  in  the  reservoir  during  construction  might  be  controlled  most 
economically  and  efficiently  by  constructing  only  one  tempoiary  spillway  at  the  200- 
foot  level  controlled  by  a  Johnson  valve  having  a  capacity  of  60.000  second-feet 
under  a  static  head  of  ICO  feet.  As  this  spillway  is  to  be  used  only  during  construc- 
tion, it  would  not  be  necessary  to  provide  slide  gate?  so  that  the  Johnson  valve  may 
be  unwatered  for  inspection  and  repairs.  If  a  summer  flood,  such  as  that  which 
occurred  in  1917.  miist  be  taken  care  of  when  the  dam  is  nearing  the  300-foot  level, 
the  temporary  spillway  will  be  taxed  to  its  maximum  capacity  of  60,000  second-feet. 
As  the  dam  is  raised  aJ-ove  the  300-foot  level,  the  storage  capacity  of  the  reservoir 
becomes  much  greater,  so  that  a  spillway  capacity  of  lew  than  60.000  second-feet 
would  be  required.  Under  this  plan,  the  dam  could  be  built  to  its  full  height  without 
fear  of  its  being  overtopped  by  a  flood  during  construction. 

The  tunnels  leading  to  the  power  house  may  be  located  at  the  600-foot  level.  Since 
this  paper  deals  primarily  with  the  design  of  a  rock-fill  dam.  no  attempt  will  be  made 
to  determine  the  most  feasible  location  for  the  power  tunnels. 

The  summer  floods  are  caused  by  the  melting  snows  in  Colorado.  Utah,  and  Wyom- 
ing. From  the  records  cf  precipitation,  the  volume  of  t,he  coming  summer  flood  can 
be  determined  with  fair  accuracy  60  days  in  advance.  A  permanent  spillway  should 
be  provided  at  the  600-foot  level  so  that  the  water  level  in  the  reservoir  ciay  be  drawn 
down  to  provide  sufficient  capacity  to  take  care  of  a  flood  much  greater  than  any 
heretofore  recorded. 

These  in  charge  of  the  operation  of  the  reservoir  would  be  more  concerned  with  the 
volume  of  run-off  than  with  the  magnitude  of  the  flood  peak.  The  quantity  of  snow 
in  the  upper  basin  would  indicate  whether  the  expected  run-off  would  be  high,  low, 
or  average  in  volume,  ^n  extended  period  of  high  temperatures,  accompanied  by  a 
warm  rain  or  "chinook"  wind,  would  cai  se  a  flood  of  great  magnitude  but  of  short 
duration.  It  would  be  impossible  to  predict  such  conditions  60  days  in  advance, 
but  a  study  of  the  run-off  records  for  the  past  20  years  would  afford  a  fairly  accurate 
basis  for  a  prediction  as  to  the  time  the  summer  flood  may  be  expceted. 

Pout  vnstrtietion. — As  coal  is  abundant  within  15  miles  from  the  site,  a 

steam  plant  could  be  built  to  furnish  powfr  during  construction.  After  the  dam  has 
been  raised  above  the  200-foot  level  and  the  water  is  passing  through  the  temporary 
spillway,  power  may  be  had  by  constructing  a  hydroelectric  plant  at  the  outlet  of 
this  tunnel. 

CONCLUSION-. 

1.  At  thp  site  of  the  Lee  Ferry  Dam.  the  canyon  is  narrow  and  the  red  sandstone  is 
of  good  quality.    These  conditions  favor  the  construction  of  a  rock-fill  dam.    It  seems 
probable  that  practically  all  of  the  50.000.000  cubic  yards  of  rock  for  the  fill  can  be 
blasted  into  place.    However,  it  will  be  necessary,  or  at  least  advisable,  to  resort  to 
the  hand-and-derrick  method  in  placing  a  part  of  the  rock  in  the  portion  of  the  dam 
above  the  600- foot  level.    The  slopes  of  the  finished  dam  are  not  expected  to  conform 
exactly  with  those  shown  on  figure  3,  but  it  is  the  writer's  opinion  that  the  average 
slope  should  not  be  steeper. 

2.  (Kdng  to  the  favorable  conditions  at  the  site  of  the  dam.  the  writer  believes  it 
entir-r-ly  tVa-ible  to  raise  the  dam  to  the  250-foot  level  with  the  first  discharge  of  the 
mines.     The  quantity  of  material  required  to  form  a  dam  250  feet  high  depends  on 
the  depth  to  the  layer  of  boulders  and  the  depth  to  bedrock.     It  would  be  advisable, 
therefore,  to  test  the  river  channel  for  bedrock  by  diamond-drill  borings.  • 

3.  It  would  not  be  necessary  to  by-pass  the  flood  water  until  the  dam  has  been 
raised  to  an  elevation  of  200  feet  above  the  bed  of  the  river,  except  that  provision 
must,  be  made  to  meet  the  demand  for  water  for  irrigation. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIX.  179 

4.  Provision  should  be  made  to  control  the  water  level  in  the  reservoir  above  an 
elevation  of  200  feet  in  order  to  facilitate  the  sluicing  of  fine  material  into  the  rock 
fill  to  make  it  water  tight. 

5.  Flood  water  should  not  be  permitted  to  overtop  the  dam  after  it  has  been  built 
higher  than  200  feet  above  the  river  bed. 

I.   A  permanent  spillway  should  be  provided  at  the  600-foot  level. 

7.  The  raw  materials  necessary  for  the  construction  of  rock-fill  dam  are  conven- 
iently situated. 

S.  "in  this  project  it  is  planned  to  do  on  a  large  scale  what  has  often  been  success- 
fully accomplished  on  a  smaller  scale.  The  writer  believes  the  most  uncertain 
feat'ure  of  the  project  is  the  work  of  making  the  rock  fill  water-tight.  If  the  seepage 
through  the  dam  is  sufficient  to  cause  erosion  it  would  not  be  very  expensive,  con- 
sidering the  magnitude  of  the  project,  to  blast  in  the  canyon  walls  and  produce  a 
0:1  slope  from  the  crest  of  the  dam  to  the  lower  toe. 

9.  The  writer  believes  that  a  rock-fill  dam  properly  constructed  would  be  fully  as 
safe  as  a  concrete  dam.     To  the  design  herein  presented  for  a  rock-fill  dam.  the  unit 
stresses  developed  in  the  foundation  and  abutment  walls  are  low  and  need  be  given 
minor  consideration.     This  type  of  dam.  however,  may  be  subject  to  failure  due  to 
a  blowout  which  might  be  caused  by  the  upward  hydrostatic  pressure  of  the  water 
percolating  under  the  foundation.     The  writer  believes  that  the  rock-fill  dam  de- 
scribed in  this  paper  would  be  safe  against  blowouts  or  erosion.     Should  erosion 
occur,  no  doubt  the  trouble  could  be  remedied  long  before  there  was  any  real  danger 
of  the  dam  failing. 

Should  either  the  rock-fill  or  a  concrete  dam  be  overtopped  by  a  flood,  the  damage 
mi^ht  be  sufficient  to  cause  failure.  A  flood  passing  over  the  top  of  the  rock-fill  dam 
would  cause  at  least  a  partial  failure  of  the  dam.  The  seriousness  of  the  damage 
would  depend  on  the  magnitude  and  duration  of  the  flood. 

Because  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir  is  enormous,  it  is  a  comparatively  simple 
matter  to  provide  adequate  spillway  capacity,  and  the  chances  of  a  dam  being  over- 
topped by  a  flood  are  remote. 

10.  A  concrete  dam  built  at  the  Lee  Ferry  site  to  raise  the  water  700  feet  above 
the  bed  of  the  river  would  have  a  volume  of  about  5.400,000  cubic  yards  and  would 
probably  cost,  including  spillway  structures,  about  fSO.OCO.OCO.     It  is  difficult  to 
estimate  the  cost  of  a  dam  of  the  rock-fill  type,  but  a  liberal  estimate  indicates  that 
it  would  be  little  more  than  half  that  of  the  concrete  dam. 


XE\V  YOKK,   July  1,  IB 
Hon.  CARL  HAYDEN, 

House  of  Representatives,  Washington,  D.  C. 

MY  DEAR  SIR:  Inaccordance  with  my  letter  of  the  23d  ult.,  lam  inclosing  herewith 
a  proof  of  the  discussion  by  Arthur  P.  Davis,  past  president  American  Society  of  Civil 
Engineers,  on  the  paper  by  E.  C.  LaRue,  entitled  "Tentative  plan  for  the  construction 
of  a  780-foot  rock-fill  dam  on  the  Colorado  River  at  Lee  Ferry,  Ariz.,  "  for  the  use  of  the 
Committee  on  Irrigation  of  Arid  Lands. 
Yours  very  truly, 

ELBERT  M.  CHANDLER, 
Acting  Secretary  American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers. 

TENTATIVE  PLAN  FOR  THE  CONSTRUCTION  OF  A  780-FooT  ROCK-FILL  DAM  ON  THE 

COLORADO  RIVER. 

[By  Arthur  P.  Davis,  Director  United  States  Reclamation  Service,  Washington,  D.  C.,  past  president 
American  Society  of  Civil  Engineering.] 

The  first  proposition  known  to  the  writer  for  constructing  a  high  dam  in  a  large 
stream  on  an  alluvial  bottom  by  dumping  loose  rock  into  the  flowing  water  without 
diverting  the  river  or  excavating;  the  foundation  was  made  by  the  late  A.  (i.  Menocal, 
member  American  Society  of  Civil  Engineering,  chief  engineer  of  the  Maritime  Canal 
Co.,  who  proposed  such  an  operation  for  a  dam  about  65  feet  in  heighth  on  the  San 
Juan  River  a  few  miles  below  the  mouth  of  the  San  Carlos  at  a  point  called  Ochoa, 
where  the  river  forms  the  boundary  line  between  Costa  Rica  and  Nicaragua.  The 
following  extract  from  a  paper  prepared  by  Mr.  Menocal  for  the  water  commerce 
congress  at  Chicago  in  1893  describes  the  dam  and  method  of  construction: 

It  consists  in  dumping  from  an  aerial  suspension  conveyor  large  and  small  material 
properly  assorted,  across  the  river  from  bank  to  bank  until  a  barrier  is  created  suffi- 
ciently high  and  strong  to  arrest  the  flow  and  hold  the  waters  at  the  required  level, 
the  body  of  the  dam  to  be  made  up  of  large  blocks  of  stone,  weighing  from  1  to  10  tons, 
and  smaller  material  to  fill  the  voids.  Its  base  will  be  quite  broad  as  compared  with 


180      DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN. 

the  height,  probably  from  400  to  500  feet  between  the  foot  of  the  up-stream  slope  and 
the  end  of  the  apron.  The  top  is  estimated  30  feet  wide,  the  rock  up-stream  slope  1 
to  1 ,  and  the  apron,  or  downstream  slope ,  4  to  1 ,  with  the  lower  portion  flattening  down 
to  5  or  6  to  1.  On  the  upstream  side  small  material,  such  as  stone,  fragments  of  gravel, 
clay,  etc.,  selected  as  circumstances  may  require,  will  be  deposited  as  the  work  ad- 
vances, in  sufficient  quantity,  as  tight  as  wanted.  It  is  not  expected  or  even  desirable 
to  have  a  water-tight  structure,  the  object  sought  being  simply  to  oppose  such  an 
obstruction  to  the  river  as  may  be  necessary  to  hold  the  waters  at  the  required  level. 
The  minimum  flow  of  the  river  is  about  ten  times  the  water  needed  for  working  the 
canal.  Consequently,  nine-tenths  of  it  can  l>c  wasted  with  advantage.  That  the 
dam  will  eventaully  become  tight  there  can  be  no  doubt,  as  the  small  drifts  and  detritus 
forced  in  by  the  current  will  gradually  fill  the  voids  and  consolidate  the  structure. 

"The  method  of  construction  will  be  quite  simple.  After  protecting  the  abut- 
ments against  possible  erosion,  large  pieces  of  rock  will  be  dumped  in  the  bed  of  the 
stream  from  three  or  four  cableways  spanning  the  valley.  The  material  should  be 
distributed  uniformly  over  the  area  under  the  main  portion  of  the  dam,  commencing 
upstream  and  keeping  up,  as  nearly  as  possible,  an  even  level.  Scouring  will  soon 
cause  settling  of  the  blokes  into  firmer  soil,  the  upper  level  in  the  meantime  being 
constantly  raised  by  depositing  more  stone,  while  the  small  material  is  being  forced 
by  the  current  into  the  voids,  and  the  overflow  dislodging  and  rearranging  the  unstable 
blocks  until  they  reach  a  final  resting  place.  This  process  to  be  continued  until  the 
resistance  at  the  bottom  becomes  so  great  as  to  check  scouring  due  to  maximum 
pressure,  when  the  dam  will  be  carried  up  to  the  desired  level.  The  river,  in  the  mean- 
time running  over  the  mound,  will  readjust  the  material  in  and  adapt  the  apron  to 
the  necessary  conditions  of  stability  to  withstand  the  effect  of  the  fall,  and  carry  off 
the  water  safely.  If  the  dam  is  then  raised  so  as  to  shut  off  a  whole  or  the  largest  part 
of  the  river  flow,  which  can  by  that  time  be  discharged  over  the  waste  weirs,  the  struc- 
ture will  be  permanent."  (H.  Doc.  279,  54th  Cong.,  first  sess.,  p.  53.) 

It  was  proposed  that  this  dam  be  an  overflow  weir,  and  this  feature  has  been  gen- 
erally condemned. 

The  Nicaragua  Canal  Board,  consisting  of  the  late  Col.  William  Ludlow,  member 
American  Society  of  Civil  Engineering,  Admiral  Mordecai  T.  Endicott,  and  the  late 
Alfred  Noble,  past  presidents  American  Society  of  Civil  Engineering,  studied  the 
plans  of  the  company  and  made  the  following  comments  on  this  design : 

"It  appears  from  this  account  of  typical  existing  dams  that,  although  rock-fill 
dams  are  not  new,  and  although  weirs  have  been  built  on  sand  and  maintained  suc- 
cessfully, the  Ochoa  Dam  is  actually  without  precedent  in  its  more  serious  aspects, 
and  its  construction  will  be  far  more  difficult  than  any  that  have  been  mentioned. 
The  successful  rock-fill  dams  have  impervious  foundations  and  are  made  water-tight 
by  sheathing  or  masonry. 

"  The  materials  in  them  are  in  great  part  hand  laid,  adding  greatly  to  their  stability, 
and  none  of  them  has  been  built  in  conflict  with  the  forces  of  a  great  river  or  was  in- 
tended to  be  used  as  a  weir  for  the  discharge  of  floods. 

"As  to  this  last  point,  the  board  is  clear  in  its  judgment  that  no  such  endeavor 
should  be  made  in  the  case  of  the  Ochoa  Dam,  as  involving  an  unwarrantable  hazard 
to  the  safety  of  the  structure  and  of  the  canal  navigation. 

*  *  *  *  *  *  * 

"The  weakest  point  of  a  dam  built  as  the  company  proposes  would  probably  be  at 
the  river  bank,  where  the  loose  rock  will  meet  the  steep  clay  slope.  The  method 
proposed  for  protecting  this  point  by  lines  of  sheet  piling  and  concrete  core  seems 
entirely  inadequate.  A  better  construction  would  involve  the  use  of  a  caisson  on 
each  side  of  the  river,  located  so  as  to  be  partly  in  the  river  channel  and  partly  in  the 
firm  clay  bank,  and  sunk  by  the  pneumatic  process  to  bedrock  if  within  reach  by  that 
means,  or  if  not  at  least  below  reach  of  scour.  It  seems  probable  that  either  bedrock 
or  a  mass  of  bowlders  would  be  found  near  sea  level,  elevation  O.  The  caisson  should 
be  surmounted  by  a  concrete  wall,  extending  up  the  hillside  beyond  the  caisson  to 
the  highest  elevation  to  be  reached  by  the  water  surface  after  the  completion  of  the 
dam.  say  114  or  11(5.  A  trench  20  feet  or  so  in  depth,  or  deeper  if  necessary  to  reach 
firm  material,  should  be  excavated  in  the  hillside  for  the  core  wall.  This  work  done, 
the  river  banks  and  hillsides  below  high-water  level  should  be  covered  with  a  heavy 
mass  of  large  stones  and  an  additional  amount  held  in  reserve  before  depositing  any 
rock  in  the  river.  The  result  of  this  would  be  to  contract  somewhat  the  width  of  the 
river  channel,  which  would  at  once  scour  out  so  as  to  maintain  its  normal  cross  section. 
A  considerable  scour  would  be  desirable,  because  it  is  important  that  the  rock  mass  be 
sunk  deeply  into  the  river  bed.  since,  if  rock  or  a  bed  of  bowlders  or  heavy  gravel 
can  be  reached,  the  safety  of  the  structure  will  be  increased  greatly.  In  depositing 
rock  in  the  river  those  methods  should  be  used  which  will  indxice  scour,  and  possibly 
the  building  out  from  each  side  may  best  answer  this  purpose. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF  LOWER   COLOEADO   RIVER  BASIN.  181 

"The  rock  mound  would  be  quite  permeable,  and  the  water  pressure  against  it 
would  vary  with  the  volume  of  the  discharge.  To  make  it  hold  water,  an  embank- 
ment, which  would  form  the  real  dam,  the  rock  mound  serving  as  its  support,  must  be 
built  on  the  upstream  side.  It  is  proposed  to  make  the  embankment  of  fine  stone, 
gravel,  clay.  etc..  with  the  view  that  a  quantity  of  these  materials  should  be  carried 
well  into  the  rock  mound.  An  embankment  composed  largely  of  clay  dumped  in  the 
wat'T  would  take  a  much  flatter  slope  than  3  :  1.  For  these  reasons  the  quantity 
estimated  by  the  company  would  have  to  be  increased  largely,  and  means  may  have 
to  be  adopted,  not  contemplated  by  the  company,  to  render  the  dam  tight  enough  to 
answer  its  purpose,  as  the  permissible  leakage  is  much  less  than  the  company  has 
assumed. 

"  I>v  the  addition  of  the  embankment,  and  the  retardation  by  friction  of  the  flow 
of  water  through  the  underlying  sand  bed,  the  dam  will  be  rendered  more  secure 
from  undercutting  and  consequent  settlement;  but  some  doubt  as  to  ultimate  security 
will  still  remain.  Confdenee  would  be  gained  to  a  certain  extent  during  the  con- 
struction of  the  dam  if  no  breaches  were  caused  by  the  annual  floods,  but  it  would 
require  a  considerable  period  of  time  after  the  completion  of  the  dam  to  allay  all 
apprehension.  If  a  site  can  be  found  where  the  dam  can  be  built  above  a  rock  or 
other  stable  foundation,  the  permanence  of  the  structure  will  be  rendered  much 
more  probable  and  the  uncertainties  of  construction  reduced. 

"l<  such  a  dam  becomes  breached  with  the  great  volume  of  water  standing  at  a 
high  level  against  it.  destruction  would  follow  quickly.  The  crest,  therefore,  should 
be  raised  so  far  above  the  surface  of  the  water  in  the  pool  that  a  considerable  settle- 
ment could  be  sustained  without  sinking  the  crest  below  the  water  surface."  (H. 
Doc.  279.  54th  Cong..  1st  sess.,  pp.  61-64.) 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  board  places  emphasis  on  the  importance  of  scour  in 
settling  the  foundation  as  far  into  the  sand  as  possible.  It  is  also  to  be  noted  that 
this  eminent  board  of  engineers  was  doubtful  of  the  permanent  safety  of  a  dam  even 
of  this  height  under  these  conditions. 

The  practical  application  of  the  method  of  damming  a  large  river  by  dumping 
rock  on  a  bed  of  silt  while  the  river  flowed  over  it  was  made  by  the  SoutKern  Pacific 
Co.  in  1906,  in  the  spectacular  control  of  the  Colorado  River  when  it  was  flowing  into 
Salton  Basin.  The  same  method  was  used  in  constructing  a  cofferdam  across  the 
Colorado  River  in  making  the  final  closure  for  the  Laguna  Dam.  In  neither  case, 
however,  was  the  water  allowed  to  flow  permanently  over  the  rock-fill  as  proposed 
by  Mr.  Menocal,  and  the  rock  used  was  settled  deep  into  the  silt  by  the  erosion  of 
the  water  during  construction. 

The  author  proposes  no  means  for  effecting  a  water-tight  junction  between  the 
rock-fill  and  its  abutments,  and  the  writer  sees  no  effective  method  of  accomplishing 
such  a  junction  between  the  proposed  silt  filling  and  the  rock.  Under  such  a  head, 
water  would  follow  the  rock  with  a  velocity  likely  to  become  erosive  at  many  points, 
and  thus  open  avenues  of  danger.  The  best  solution  seems  to  be  a  concrete  pavement 
cemented  to  the  abutments  with  all  the  care  and  precaution  that  the  highest  skill 
can  suggest.  Cracks  which  might  appear  should  be  sealed  with  a  cement  gun  on 
the  first  opportunity. 

In  considering  the  construction  of  a  loose-rock  dam  in  Boulder  Canyon  during  the 
past  fe-v  years  the  ( iovernment  engineers  and  those  whom  they  have  consulted  have 
regarded  the  settlement  of  the  loose  rock  into  the  soft  material  as  deeply  as  possible 
as  one  of  the  most  important  and  difficult  operations  to  accomplish,  and  it  seems 
obvious  that  it  can  not  be  made  perfect  without  excavating  the  loose  material,  but 
might  perhaps  v  ith  many  precautions  be  made  of  sufficient  extent  to  secure  safety. 

The  author's  proposal  to  deposit  enough  rock  in  the  river  at  one  blast  to  bring  the 
dam  to  the  250-foot  level  seems  especially  designed  to  prevent  any  water  action  in 
the  direction  of  scour  and  of  sinking  the  rock  into  the  silt.  lie  says: 

"If  the  canyon  walls  were  blasted  into  the  river,  the  heavy  mass  of  material  would 
settle  to  the  level  of  the  bowlders,  assumed  to  be  60  feet  below  the  bed  of  the  river, 
and  some  of  the  fine  sand  and  silt  would  be  forced  up." 

No  reason  is  given  for  this  important  conclusion,  and  the  methods  proposed  seem 
likely  to  prevent  this  desirable  result. 

If  this  dam  were  built  by  the  methods  suggested  by  the  author,  there  would  be  a 
considerable  part  of  the  structure  below  the  river  bed  founded  upon  sanxl  and  silt. 
As  the  water  rose  in  the  reservoir  after  the  dam  was  completed,  the  head  on  this  .-ilt. 
would  gradually  increase,  and  no  assurance  could  be  given  that  a  critical  point  might 
not  be  reached  when  the  reservoir  is  nearly  full,  and  sufficient  percolation  through 
the  foundation  might  take  place  to  start  erosion  and  cut  a  channel  through  the  sill. 
A  free  channel  ever  so  small  resulting  from  the  slight  arching  of  the  rock,  which  would 
conduct  water  through  the  sand  at  a  velocity  due  to  more  than  700  feet  of  head,  would 
scour  rapidly,  carrying  considerable  rock  until  a  channel  was  excavated  large  enough 


182 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 


to  allow  the  rock  above  to  settle,  and  unless  this  was  accomplished  in  one  motion  the 
scour  would  continue  until  the  main  rock-fill  fell  into  place.  If  it  was  arched  suffi- 
ciently, it  would  not  do  so  promptly,  and  the  scour  would  continue  until  the  opening 
would  carry  a  flood  much  larger  than  normal  and  do  great  damage  below.  It  seems 
inevitable,  however,  that  eventually  the  rock  fill  would  fall  in  place  and  stop  this. 
If  in  so  doing  it  should  fall  below  the  level  of  the  water  in  the  reservoir,  the  dam 
would  be  overtopped.  No  loose  rock  dam  has  ever  been  overtopped  without  failing, 
and  some  have  failed.  None  of  them  has  had  a  780-foot  head  nor  50.000.000  acre-feet 
of  stored  water  behind  it  to  complete  its  destruction. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  the  proposed  reservoir  of  50.000.000  acre-feet  has  an 
area  of  235,000  acres  and  a  discharge  of  1,000,000  acre'feet  would  lower  the  reservoir 
only  about  6  feet.  This  would  afford  an  average  flow  of  500.000  second  feet  for  24 
hours.  No  one  can  do'ibt  that  this  would  destroy  the  dam  faster  than  it  would  lower 
the  reservoir.  The  writer  will  not  attempt  to  describe  the  results  of  suddenly  releas- 
ing 50.000,000  acre-feet  of  water.  It  would  at  least  submerge  and  destroy  the  great 
Imperial  Valley  and  all  improvements  along  the  lower  Colorado  River,  and  doubtless 
many  lives  would  be  lost. 

It  is  readily  seen  that  the  danger  of  failure  and  the  magnitude  of  the  disaster  aro 
both  greatly  augmented  with  the  height  of  the  dam.  This  law  applies  especially  to 
an  unprecedented  or  doubtful  design. 

Where  the  necessary  structure  so  far  exceeds  precedent,  to  build  it  any  higher  than 
needed  would  be  inexcusable.  The  author  appears  to  consider  a  capacity  of  20,000,000 
acre-feet  sufficient  to  regulate  the  river.  The  writer  agrees  with  this  estimate,  l;ui 
would  provide  20  per  cent  more  to  store  silt  and  prolong  the  usefulness  of  the  reservoir. 
There  can  therefore  be  no  reason  for  building  a  reservoir  of  greater  capacity  than 
about  24,000,000  acre-feet,  except  for  the  increased  head  for  power  development. 
This  site  is  so  remote  from  markets  and  so  much  farther  than  many  other  available 
sites  that  there  is  at  present  no  excuse,  and  for  many  years  or  decades  there  will  be 
no  justification,  for  developing  power  at  this  point.  The  available  head  can  be 
utili'/ed  by  building  dams  of  moderate  dimensions  at  other  points  without  such 
unprecedented  and  hazardous  characteristics. 

The  author  states  (p.  845)  that  the  construction  of  a  dam  near  Lee's  ferry  would 
remove  the  menace  from  floods  on  the  lower  river,  except  floods  from  the  Gila  River. 
That  statement  is  erroneous,  as  the  proposed  dam  would  leave  about  50,000  square 
miles  of  drainage  are  unregulated,  besides  that  of  the  Gila.  It  is  perfectly  proper,  as 
the  author  does,  to  except  the  Gila  River,  which  for  brief  periods  sometimes  furnishes 
floods  as  great  as  those  of  the  Colorado:  but  the  area  of  50,000  square  miles  between 
the  mouth  of  the  Gila  and  Lee's  ferry  should  also  be  excepted.  Most  of  this  area  can 
be  intercepted  by  a  dam  at  Boulder  Canyon,  which  is  the  lowest  point  in  the  basin 
where  this  can  be  done,  and  is  accordingly  the  proper  place  for  storage  purposes  if 
the  floods  are  to  be  controlled. 

The  author's  table  on  page  836  sn'ows  a  capacity  for  Lee  Ferry  Dam  of  50,000,000 
acre-feet  and  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  of  31,680,000  acre-feet.  The  results  of  the  actual 
surveys  were  probably  not  available  to  the  author  when  he  submitted  his  paper. 
These  surveys  have  been  in  progress  for  a  long  time  and  the  results  are  now  available 
and  are  shown  roughly  in  Table  I,  giving  comparative  area  and  capacity  for  each 
given  height  of  the  dam  as  high  as  the  surveys  have  been  carried  at  Boulder  Canyon: 

Table  I. 


Height  of  dam  above  river  bed  in  feet. 

Boulder  Canyon 
Reservoir. 

Glenn  Canyon 
Reservoir. 

Area  in 
acres. 

Capacity 
in  acre- 
feet. 

Area  in 
acres. 

Capacity 
in  acre- 
feet. 

50... 

3.500 
7,500 
15,500 
25,000 
33,500 
44,000 
57,000 
73,000 
90,000 
109,000 
132,000 
157,000 

88,000 
362,000 
937,000 
1,950,000 
3,413,000 
5,  350,  000 
7,  S75,  000 
11,125,000 
15,200,000 
20,175,000 
26,200,000 
33,425,000 

4,000 
7,000 
10,800 
16,600 
24,000 
34,000 
47,000 
63,000' 
85,000 
114,000 
145,000 
178,000 

100,000 
375.000 
820,000 
1,505,000 
2,520,000 
3,970.000 
5,995,000 
8,745,000 
12,445,000 
17,  420,  000 
23,  895,  000 
31,970,000 

100... 

150. 

200  

250. 

300  

350.   . 

400  

450... 

500  

550  

600  .                  

DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN".  183 

Table  I  shows  that  for  the  heights  given  the  Glenn  Canyon  reservoir  would  have 
less  rapacity  than  Boulder  Canyon. 

A  dam  780  feet  in  height  in  Glenn  Canyon  near  Lee's  Ferry  would  introduce  not 
only  unnecessary'  hazards  hut  would  waste  a  large  quantity  of  water  by  evaporation, 
A  reservoir  of  24, 000, 000  acre -feet  capacity  in  Glenn  Canyon  would  have  an  area  of 
about  125, 0'X)  acres,  according  to  the  available  surveys,  whereas  one  of  50,000,000 
acre-feet  capacity  would  have  a  surface  area  of  235,000  acres  and  unnecessarily  expose 
to  evaporation  110,000  acres.  This  would  be  at  its  highest  stages  during  the  hot 
months  of  June.  July.  August,  and  September.  Assuming  an  average  excess  area  of 
100,000  acres,  and  an  annual  evaporation  of  6  feet  from  the  extra  area,  600,000  acre- 
feet  of  water  would  be  wasted  annually,  all  of  which  would  be  lost  for  use  at  the  num- 
erous high  dams  eventually  to  be  built  in  the  canyon  below. 

The  utter  absence  of  anything  approaching  a  precedent  to  the  proposed  plans 
leaves  the  writer  in  much  the  same  doubts  as  those  which  remained  in  the  minds  of 
the  Nicaragua  Canal  Board  previously  quoted,  and  there  certainly  is  sufficient  doubt  so 
that  it  would  be  inexcusable  to  attempt  such  a  structure  where  more  conservative 
designs  are  possible  or  to  build  the  dam  under  these  conditions  any  higher  than 
necessary. 

( >pinions  concerning  the  safety  of  the  proposed  design  can  hardly  be  considered  of 
much  value  until  something  is  known  of  the  underground  conditions,  which  have  not. 
been  investigated  at  Glenn  Canyon.  Still  less  is  it  possible,  under  these  conditions, 
to  make  intelligent  estimates  of  cost  of  any  type  of  dam.  These  conditions.at  Boulder 
Canyon  have  been  carefully  investigated,  and  comparative  estimates  of  high  concrete 
and  rock-fill  dams  have  been  made  by  men  with  large  experience  in  the  construction 
of  high  dams.  These  estimates  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  the  rock-fill  type,  with 
proper  precautions  for  safety,  could  not  be  relied  on  to  be  much  cheaper  than  a  massive 
concrete  structure  the  safety  of  which  would  be  without  question. 


POWER  DEVELOPMENT  ON  THE  COLORADO  RIVER  AND  ITS  RELATION  TO  IRRIGATION 

AND  FLOOD  CONTROL. 

[By  O.  C.  Merrill,  executive  secretary,  Federal  Power  Commission.] 

One  of  the  most  important  and  interesting  of  our  present-day  engineering  problems 
is  the  control  and  development  of  the  Colorado  River.  Its  interest  and  importance 
arise  from  the  fact  that  it  involves  the  irrigation  of  millions  of  acres  of  land,  the  pro- 
duction of  millions  of  water  horsepower,  and  the  protection  from  floods  of  millions 
of  dollars  of  property  values,  and  that  it  affects  the  general  economic  interests  of  seven 
of  our  Slates  and  two  of  the  States  of  Mexico.  It  is  of  interest  also  in  its  political 
relations — using  this  term  in  its  etymological,  not  its  ordinary,  sense.  Seven  sovereign 
States  claim  in  the  use  of  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  rights  which  in  the  aggregate' 
mav  exceed  its  possibilities.  Its  waters  can  not  be  put  to  use  without,  the  sanction 
of  the  States  in  which  the  use  is  proposed  and  without  the  concurrent  sanction  of  the 
Federal  Government,  which  owns  the  lands  necessary  for  such  use  and  which  possesses 
a  general  control  over  the  river  from  the  fact  that  it  is  an  international  stream.  It 
remains  to  be  seen  to  what  extent  political  considerations  will  modify  engineering; 
considerations  in  the  solution  of  the  problem. 

The  two  main  branches  of  the  Colorado  rise,  the  one  in  southwestern  Wyoming,, 
the  other  in  central  Colorado.  The  length  of  the  river  from  the  headwaters  of  the 
Green  to  the  Gulf  of  California  is  about  1.750  miles.  Its  basin,  with  an  area  of  about 
250,000  square  miles,  includes  practically  all  of  Arizona,  nearly  one-half  of  Colorado 
and  of  Utah,  one-fifth  of  Wyoming  and  of  New  Mexico,  one-tenth  of  Nevada,  and  a 
narrow  strip  in  California  along  the  California-Arizona  boundary. 

The  Imperial  Valley  in  California,  though  not  topographically  a  part  of  the  Coloroad 
Basin,  should  also  be  included  because  of  its  dependence  upon  the  waters  of  the  river 
and  because  of  its  intimate  relation  to  the  general  problem  of  river  control.  Of  the 
area  of  the  basin  some  5.000,000  acres,  or  about  1  acre  in  30,  appear  economically 
irrigable.  Claims,  however,  have  been  made  that  there  is  a  much  larger  amount  of 
available  irrigable  land.  The  annual  run-off  of  the  river  at  Yuma  averages  about 
18,000,000  acre-feet.  The  average  discharge  is  about  24,000  cubic  feet  per  second,  with 
variations  from  a  minimum  of  4,000  second-feet  to  a  maximum  of  150,000  second-feet 
on  the  main  river  and  to  240.000  second-feet  by  inclusion  of  the  Gila.  The  steep  slope 
of  the  river  and  its  large  volume  make  it  capable  of  producing  some  6,000,000  water 
horsepower,  or  two-thirds  as  much  as  is  developed  in  the  United  States  to-day. 

1316— 22— PT  3 8 


184  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

A  discussion  of  the  general  problems  of  the  Colorado  will  be  made  clearer  if  we  divide 
the  river  into  three  sections  and  consider  the  characteristics  of  these  sections  and  their 
relations  to  each  other. 

The  upper  section  from  the  headwaters  to  the  Utah-Arizona  line,  just  below  the 
mouth  of  the  San  Juan,  comprises  about  40  per  cent  of  the  area  of  the  basin  and  affords 
about  87  per  cent  of  the  total  run-off,  or  an  average  of  about  15,000.000  acre-feet  per 
annum.  In  this  section  are  some  2, 500, 000- acres  of  irrigable  land,  one-half  of  the 
estimated  total  in  the  basin.  It  also  has  power  possibilities  aggregating  2.000,000 
horsepower.  In  this  section,  both  upon  the  main  stream  and  upon  its  tributaries,  are 
many  favorable  reservoir  sites  by  means  of  which  it  would  be  practicable  to  regulate 
the  flow  of  streams  for  irrigation  within  the  section,  or  for  power  development  both 
within  the  section  and  outside,  or.  if  desirable,  for  flood  control  on  the  lower  river.  In 
so  far  as  the  tributaries  arennvolved.  these  several  uses  would  conflict  to  a  considerable 
degree  and  only  a  careful  study  of  the  whole  section  could  determine  the  best  com- 
bination of  uses.  At  the  lower  end  of  the  section  is  the  so-called  Glenn  Canyon  re- 
servoir site,  which  has  an  important  bearingon  all  developments  and  uses  of  water  below. 
The  middle  section  from  the  mouth  of  the  San  Juan  to  the  mouth  of  the  Williams 
comprises  about  35  per  cent  of  the  area  of  the  basin  and  supplies  about  7  per  cent  of 
the  annual  run-off.  There  are  no  irrigable  lands  along  the  river  in  this  section  and 
only  some  250,000  acres  on  the  tributaries,  none  of  which  can  be  reached  from  the 
main  river.  In  this  section,  however,  there  is  a  total  drop  of  about  3,000  feet,  capable, 
if  fully  utilizing  the  average  annual  run-off  entering  the  section,  of  producing  4,000.000 
horsepower.  Except  for  the  Boulder  Canyon  site  near  the  lower  end  of  the  section, 
which  would  have  no  effect  on  the  greater  part  of  this  section,  there  appear  to  be  no 
storage  sites  capable  of  providing  any  considerable  amount  of  seasonal  storage.  Dams 
erected  for  power  development  would  be  primarily  for  the  purpose  of  concentrating 
head  and  of  providing  pondage  for  daily  load  regulation.  Seasonal  regulation  would 
be  dependent  upon  storage  in  the  upper  section. 

The  lower  section  from  the  mouth  of  the  Williams  River  to  the  Gulf  and  including 
the  drainage  of  the  Gila  and  the  Imperial  and  Coachella  Valleys  in  California  com- 
prises some  25  per  cent  of  the  total  area  of  the  basin  and  furnishes  about  6  per  cent  of 
the  average  annual  run-off.  Its  power  possibilities  are  relatively  unimportant,  but  it 
contains  some  2,250,000  acres  of  irrigable  land,  the  most  fertile  and  most  valuable  in 
the  basin,  a  large  part  of  which  is  periodically  endangered  by  floods.  There  appear 
to  be  no  reservoir  sites  of  consequence  below  Boulder  Canyon  on  the  main  river,  but 
there  are  such  sites  on  the  Gila  which  could  be  used  both  for  irrigation  and  for  con- 
trolling the  Gila  floods. 

Mewed  solely  from  the  physical  standpoint,  the  upper  section  of  the  basin  might 
have  its  primary  development  directed  either  toward  irrigation  or  toward  water  power; 
or  it  might,  as  it  probably  will,  have  a  combination  of  these  two  uses.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  middle  section,  with  the  exception  of  storage  below  the  mouth  of  the  Vir- 
gin and  of  relatively  small  irrigable  areas  on  the  tributaries,  is  suitable  only  for  power 
development .  Eq  ually  clearly  the  waters  reaching  the  lower  section  should  be  devoted 
primarily,  if  not  exclusively,  to  irrigation,  and  the  storage  sites  should  be  employed 
for  irrigation  or  flood  control,  or  both. 

The  most  immediately  pressing  problem  on  the  Colorado  River  is  flood  control  for 
the  protection  of  the  Imperial  Valley  in  California.  I  shall  not  attempt,  however, 
to  discuss  it  in  detail,  but  merely  to  present  certain  aspects  of  that  problem  in  the 
relation  they  bear  to  water  power  and  to  a  general  plan  of  river  development. 

The  Gulf  of  California  originally  extended  northwesterly  into  what  is  now  the  State 
of  California.  The  silt-laden  water  of  the  river  gradually  formed  a  delta  cone  extend- 
ing across  the  gulf,  cutting  off  the  northern  end  and  deflecting  the  flow  of  the  river  to 
the  south.  The  water  inclosed  in  the  northern  end  evaporated,  leaving  the  depres- 
sion known  as  the  Imperial  Valley  and  the  Salton  Sea,  with  its  surface  250  feet  below 
sea  level.  The  silt-formed  delta  is  unstable.  The  river  is  constantly  depositing 
more  sediment  and  shifting  its  channel  back  and  forth  over  the  flat  ridge — some  30 
feet  above  sea  level — which  forms  the  crest  of  the  delta,  and  there  is  danger  at  each 
flood  season  that  it  may  break  northward  into  the  Imperial  Valley  instead  of  continu- 
ing southward  into  the  gulf.  The  river  did  break  through  in  1905  and  for  more  than 
a  year  and  a  half  discharged  into  Salton  Sea  before  it  was  turned  back  with  great 
difficulty  and  expense  into  its  old  channel.  The  levees  which  were  later  built  to 
protect  the  valley  have  several  times  been  awash  in  periods  of  floods.  It  is  necessary 
to  raise  them  about  a  foot  a  year  to  keep  pace  with  the  rise  of  the  river  channel,  and 
it  is  only  a  matter  of  time  when  the  river  will  break  through  again  unless  steps  are 
taken  to  control  the  floods.  The  situation  is  further  complicated  by  the  fact  that  the 
works  for  protecting  the  Imperial  Valley  are  situated  in  Mexico.  It  is  this  condition 
of  affairs  which  has  placed  primary  emphasis  on  flood  control  in  all  plans  for  the  devel- 
opment of  the  Colorado  River. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  185 

Flood  conditions  on  the  lower  Colorado  may  be  caused  either  by  high  water  on  the 
main  river  or  high  water  on  the  Gila.  Flood  eonditoins  on  the  main  river  occur 
annually  in  the  summer  season,  are  due  to  the  melting  of  snows  on  the  headwaters  of 
the  streams,  and  continue  on  the  average  from  two  to  three  months.  The  maximum 
flood  from  the  main  river  in  the  years  of  record,  1902  to  1914,  inclusive,  has  been 
150,000  second-feet.  The  average  mean  monthly  discharge  during  the  three  high 
months  of  >fay,  June,  and  July  for  this  same  period  of  record  has  been:  May,  42,600; 
June,  73,100:  and  July,  43, 500* second-feet.  While  the  floods  from  the  Gila  approach 
in  magnitude  those  of  the  main  river,  they  occur  in  the  winter  season,  are  caused 
by.  local  rains,  and  are  of  short  duration.  Should  it  happen,  however,  by  any  com- 
bination of  circumstances  that  extreme  flood  conditions  on  the  Gila  should  coincide 
with  similar  conditions  on  the  main  river,  a  break  through  into  the  Imperial  Valley 
would  be  almost  inevitable. 

On  account  of  the  volume  of  water  involved,  it  is  apparent  that  protection  from 
Colorado  River  floods  can  be  had  only  by  storage  and  by  storage  of  large  capacity.  It, 
is  also  apparent  that  full  immunity  from  flood  damages  can  be  had  only  by  storage  on 
the  Gila  as  well  as  storage  on  the. Colorado.  Since,  however,  storage  on  the  Gila  has 
only  an  indirect  relation  to  the  general  problem  of  the  Colorado  River,  it  will  be  given 
no  further  consideration  here. 

There  appear  to  be  three  practicable  locations  for  flood  control  reservoirs  of  the 
capacity  necessary.  These  are  on  the  headwater  tributaries,  on  the  main  river  at 
Glen  Canyon,  and  on  the  main  river  at  Boulder  Canyon.  Storage  on  the  headwaters 
would  require  several  reservoirs,  and  even  though  practicable  from  a  purely  flood- 
control  standpoint,  such  a  plan  involves  at  least  two  serious  objections.  The  opera- 
tion of  such  reservoirs  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  lower  river  would  be  likely  to  interfere 
to  a  considerable  degree  with  the  use  of  the  waters  for  irrigation  in  the  upper  section 
and  to  a  lesser  degree  for  power  development,  depending  upon  their  location  and  their 
manner  of  operation.  If  duplication  of  investment  is  to  be  avoided,  flood-control 
reservoirs  must  also  provide  irrigation  storage  for  the  lower  river.  To  operate  for  this 
purpose  reservoirs  located  hundreds  of  miles  above  the  lands  to  be  irrigate  d  would  be 
an  extremely  difficult  problem  and  would  inevitably  result  in  wastage  of  water  and 
consequently  in  a  storage  capacity  greater  than  would  otherwise  be  necessary. 

Adequate  storage  for  both  flood  control  and  irrigation  could  apparently  be  had  at  the 
Glen  Canyon  site  at  the  Utah-Arizona  line.  From  an  irrigation  standpoint  this  site 
presents  similar  objections,  though  less  in  degree,  to  sites  on  the  headwaters,  since 
the  reservoir  would  still  be  a  considerable  distance  from  the  lands  to  be  irrigated. 
From  a  flood-control  standpoint,  however,  it  appears  adequate.  It  would  intercept 
87  per  cent  of  the  run-off  of  the  basin,  and  would  include  every  tributary  of  conse- 
quence above  the  Gila,  except  the  Little  Colorado.  This  stream  is  subject  only  to 
flash  floods  and  enters  the  main  river  so  far  above  the  Imperial  Valley  that  its  floods 
can  not  be  considered  as  dangerous.  Storage  at  this  point  is  of  sufficient  capacity 
to  provide  for  power  development  and  irrigation  as  well  as  for  flood  control,  and 
hence  would  not  interfere  with,  but  be  a  distinct  aid  to,  power  development  in  the 
middle  section. 

The  proposed  Boulder  Canyon  site  has  certain  distinct  advantages  over  all  other 
sites  if  considered  wholly  from  the  standpoint  of  the  flood  control  and  irrigation  re- 
quirements of  the  Imperial  Valley.  It  is  comparatively  near  to  the  irrigable  lands, 
and  operation  difficulties  would  be  reduced  to  a  minimum.  It  will  intercept  all  floods 
on  the  river,  except  those  from  the  Gila.  It  would  even  be  possible  to  ameliorate 
flood  conditions  from  the  Gila  by  stopping  all  discharge  from  the  main  river  while  the 
Gila  is  in  flood.  If  nothing  but  the  flood  control  and  irrigation  requirements  of  the 
Imperial  Valley  were1  to  be  considered,  ihere  would  appear  to  be  no  doubt  of  the  su- 
perior advantages  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  site.  When,  however,  consideration  is  given 
to  the  problem  of  development  of  the  river  as  a  whole,  the  situation  is  by  no  means  so 
clear. 

Both  the  Glen  Canyon  and  the  Boulder  Canyon  sites  are  likely  eventually  to  be 
built,  and  both  present  engineering  problems  of  magnitude.  To  provide  the  proposed 
minimum  storage  capacity  of  21,000,000  acre-feet  at  Boulder  Canyon  and  an  equal 
amount  at  Glen  Canyon  will  require  dams  of  unprecedented  height.  Preliminary  plans 
propose  a  masonry  dam  at  Boulder  Canyon  some  530  feet  in  height  above  the  river  chan- 
nel. When  it  is  realized  that  the  river  channel  has  a  depth  of  l:)">  I'eet  below  \\aier 
level,  that  the  river  flows  through  a  narrow  canyon,  and  that  floods  in  excess  of  100,000 
second-feet  are  likely  to  be  encountered  during  construction,  the  magnitude  of  the 
engineering  problems  to  be  met  will  be  appreciated. 

Detailed  investigation,  particularly  borings,  have  not  yet  been  made  of  the  Glen 
Canyon  site,  and  the  type  of  dam  has  therefore  not  been  determined.  If  foundation 
conditions  are  not  more  unfavorable,  this  site  should  from  the  construction  standpoint 


186  DEVELOPMENT    OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    BA.-IX. 

have  certain  distinct  advantages  over  the  Boulder  Canyon  site.  The  river  forms  a 
double  loop  at  the  dam  site,  one-half  of  which  is  28,000  feet  around,  but  at  its  nan 
parts  only  3,000  feet  across  at  water  level,  and  only  2.000  feet  at  500  feet  above  water 
level.  This  condition  provides  better  opportunity  for  handling  water  during  con- 
struction than  at  Boulder  Canyon  and  also  affords  better  opportunity  for  '  obstructing 
outlet  works  and  spillway  independent  of  the  darn  carrying  by  the  one  through  and 
the  other  over  the  narrow  section  whkh  separates  the  two  sides  of  the  loop. 

When  we  consider  the  relation  of  irrigation  to  power  development  u~e  find  that 
only  about  one  acre  in  thirty  in  the  Colorado  basin  i.s  irrisrable.  but  that  it  has  ]••>••  <>r 
resources  more  than  sufficient  to  meet  its  needs  for  generations.  viilce  it  is  likely  to 
require  all  the  agricultural  products  that  its  lands  can  supply  long  before  it  has  put 
to  use  all  its  potential  water  powers,  it  would  appear  the  part  of  wisdom  to  dedicate 
the  waters  of  its  streams  to  irrigation  to  the  extent  they  can  be  efficiently  used  for 
such  purpose,  leaving  water-pov  <-r  di'\elopment  to  take  the  second  phve.  If  reason- 
ably conservative  practices  are  followed  and  all  unnecessary  .  i<'d.  there 
appears  to  be  ample  water  in  the  Colorado  and  its  tributaries  to  irrigate  all  lands 
v  ithin  economic  reach  of  the  streams.  The  problem  of  water  supply  for  such  pur- 
!  is,  therefore,  one  of  e  >uitab!e  distribution:  and  this  is  the  problem  which  the 
Colorado  River  Commission  has  been  created  io  solve.  I  shall  not  discuss  it  further 
than  to  say  that,  if  irrigation  be  assumed  as  the  dominant  UPC.  tlu-'v  v.  uiiM  still  be 
opportunity  to  develop  hundreds  of  thousands  of  horsepower  in  the  upper  basin  ui:di  r 
properly  developed  plans  and  that,  from  the  water  which  would  be  reli-;i-"<J  from  the 
upper  section  for  the  irrigation  requirements  of  the  1"  mild  still 
be  available  millions  of  horsepo  '  er  in  the  middle  section. 

Since  there  v- ill  be  no  irrigation  development  in  the  middle  section  of  the  river 
other  than  the  probability  of  the  provision  of  irrigation  storage  at  the  lov  er  end  of 
the  section,  and  since  no  water  v  ill  be  withdrawn  from  the  river  in  ;•  •  -  :i  for 
such  purpose,  there  w  ill  be  no  coil:  ict  bet '  een  irrigation  and  po  >  er.  In  the  upper 
section,  hov  ever,  such  conflict  is  certain  to  exist.  >ot  only  v  ill  water  be  permanently 
withdrawn  from  the  river,  but  storage  reservoirs  can  not  be  fully  used  for  both  pur- 
poses. For  this  reason,  a?  well  as  on  account  of  the  greater  volume  of  v  ater  and  the 
greater  fall,  the  middle  section  is  the  most  favorable  for  po'^er  development.  But 
power  development  on  the  Colorado,  as  well  a.s  irrigation  and  Hood  control,  requires 
seasonal  storage.  This  is  necessary  not  only  to  produce  a  regulated  lio  v.  but,  in  the 
canyon  section  at  least,  as  a  protection  airainst  floods,  for  the  narrowness  of  the  river 
channel  and  the  consequent  restricted  spilhvav  length  is  likely  to  produce  depths  of 
discharge  in  flood  season  that  might  seriously  restrict  the  height  of  dams  that  it 
would  be  safe  to  construct. 

Sufficient  capacity  for  seasonal  regulation  can  not  on  account  of  topographic  condi- 
tions be  secured  in  the  middle  section  except  at  Boulder  Canyon,  and  that  of  course 
is  available  only  for  use  at  that  site  or  below.  For  the  greater  part  of  the  section 
storage  must  be  either  at  the  head  of  the  section  or  in  the  upper  river.  If  it  shall  prove 
feasible  of  construction.  Glen  Canyon  reservoir  is  peculiarly  well  adapted  for  the  pur- 
pose. It  is  situated  at  the  crest  of  the  steep  canyon  slope,  and  appears  to  have  a 
capacity  sufficient  to  equalize  the  flow  of  the  river  over  a  series  of  years. 

The  fact  that  this  reservoir  must  eventually  be  built  in  connection  with  power 
developments  below  and  that  when  built  it  is  likely  of  itself  to  solve  the  flood  prob- 
lem of  the  main  river  has  naturally  raised  the  question,  why  build  both  Glen  Canyon 
and  Boulder  Canyon,  or,  if  both,  w-hy  build  the  latter  first?  The  construction  of  Glen 
Canyon  reservoir  by  eliminating  flood  conditions  would  make  the  construction  of  all 
dams  in  the  river  below  far  easier,  cheaper,  and  safer.  Nothing  which  may  be  done 
at  Boulder  Canyon  will  obviate  in  any  degree  the  eventual  necessity  for  Glen  Canyon 
reservoir  or  reduce  the  difficulties  of  other  construction  in  the  canyon  above.  On 
the  other  hand,  if  Glen  Canyon  is  built,  the  greater  part  of  Boulder  Canyon  storage — 
as  storage — would  become  useless.  It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  the  prior  construc- 
tion of  this  dam  could  be  justified  only  on  one  or  both  of  two  grounds:  Either  that  the 
imminence  of  the  peril  to  the  Imperial  Valley  justifies  the  cost  of  the  Boulder  Canyon 
Dam  even  if  only  temporarily  required  for  flood  control  purposes;  or  that  the  cost  is 
justified,  independently  of  storage,  by  the  additional  power  that  could  thus  be  pro- 
duced by  a  dam  of  the  height  proposed.  In  any  event,  some  storage  below  the  Virgin 
is  desirable,  if  not  necessary,  even  if  Glen  Canyon  reservoir  is  constructed,  in  order 
to  regulate  the  water  at  that  point  to  meet  immediate  irrigation  requirements  farther 
down  the  river.  Which  reservoir  should  be  built  first  and  whether  the  full  capacity 
of  both  is  needed  are  questions  about  which  there  is  considerable  difference  of  opinion. 
I  shall  only  say  that  there  appears  to  be  enough  doubt  to  warrant  a  thorough  study 
of  the  upper  site  before  commitment  is  made  to  Boulder  Canyon,  and  that  in  such 
study  due  consideration  should  be  given  to  power  developments  in  the  middle  section 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BA.S1X.  187 

as  well  as  to  irrigation  and  flood  control  on  the  lower  section.  I  have  placed  emphasis 
upon  this  question  of  the  location  of  primary  storage,  whether  at  the  head  or  at  the 
foot  of  the  middle  section,  because  it  is  a  factor  of  great  importance  in  the  problems 
of  power  development  and  may  determine  the  entire  course  of  such  development 
upon  the  river. 

The  extent  of  the  interest  in  the  power  possibilities  of  the  Colorado  River  may  be 
judged  from  the  fact  that  there  are  on  file  with  the  Federal  Power  Commission  20 
applications  affecting  the  Colorado  River  and  its  tributaries  aggregating  four  and  one- 
half  million  primary  horsepower  and  (i. 000, 000  horsepower  of  estimated  installation. 
It  is,  however,  quite  apparent  that  no  such  amount  of  power  will  be  developed  in  the 
near  future  simply  because  it  could  not  be  disposed  of.  The  rate  of  power  develop- 
ment on  the  Colorado  is  a  question  of  markets.  The  sites  at  the  headwaters  will 
gradually  be  developed  to  supplement  the  existing  Utah  and  Colorado  power  systems. 
When  we  turn  to  the  middle  or  canyon  section,  however,  we  find  that  local  demands 
for  power  in  this  part  of  the  Colorado  Basin  are  hardly  sufficient  to  justify  at  the 
present  time  any  large-scale  development.  The  mining  market  of  central  Arizona 
probably  would  justify  an  initial  development  of  some  100,000  horsepower,  but  to 
justify  large-scale  development  utilizing  any  such  storage  as  proposed  at  either  Boulder 
Canyon  or  Glenn  Canyon  would  require  that  primary  markets  be  sought  outside 
the  basin,  a  situation  involving  long-distance  high-tension  transmission. 

The  only  section  which  at  present  seems  capable  of  furnishing  the  requisite  demand, 
and  the  section  which  gives  greatest  promise  of  increasing  its  demand  in  the  near 
future,  is  the  southern  half  of  the  State  of  California.  Notwithstanding  the  great 
power  resources  of  that  State,  objection  is  already  being  raised  against  the  diversion 
southward  of  the  electric  energy  generated  from  the  waters  of  the  central  and  northern 
sections  of  the  State.  With  the  continued  depletion  of  its  oil  reserves  and  with 
increasing  industrial  and  agricultural  development,  the  time  appears  not  far  distant 
when  California,  sould  it  maintain  its  present  growth  of  power  demand,  would  be 
required  to  go  outside  its  boundaries  for  new  sources  of  power,  even  if  economic 
considerations  did  not  lead  it  to  do  so  at  a  much  earlier  date. 

The  development  of  power  in  the  basin  of  the  Colorado  for  use  outside  will,  however, 
be  an  advantage,  not  a  disadvantage,  to  the  people  and  the  industries  within  the 
basin.  The  potential  power  available  is  more  than  the  basin  itself  is  ever  likely  to 
require.  If  power  is  developed  on  such  a  scale  and  at  such  a  cost  that  it  can  be 
economically  delivered  in  large  quantities,  hundreds  of  miles  from  the  point  of  genera- 
tion, it.  can  be  economically  delivered  near  at  hand  in  smaller  quantities,  and  this 
fact,  if  the  power  is  developed  under  proper  auspices,  would  result  in  the  extension 
of  facilities  to  existing  local  markets  and  in  the  development  of  new  ones;  for  the 
most  complete  disposition  of  its  products  is  the  ultimate  object  of  power  develop- 
ment. The  mining  areas  within  the  basin,  the  railroads  which  traverse  it.  the  towns 
within  it  and  along  its  margin,  all  would  be  sought  out  as  users  of  power  once  develop- 
ment were  made  and  the  main  t-ansmission  system  established.  Distribution  of 
power  throughout  a  sparsely  settled  area  is,  however,  likely  to  be  attempted  only 
through  extensions  from  a  transmission  network  constructed  primarily  to  serve  other 
and  more  extensive  markets  elsewhere.  The  States  within  the  Colorado  Basin  would 
never  have  secured  the  railroad  sendee  they  now  possess  had  they  not  been  on  the 
main  routes  between  the  Mississippi  Valley  and  the  Pacific  Coast.  They  will  be  in 
a  similarly  favorable  position  with  respect  to  electric  power  service  when  trunk  trans- 
mission lines  are  constructed  across  their  territories. 

The  final  factor  which  determines  whether  power  sites  can  be  utilized,  the  degree 
to  which  they  may  be  developed,  and  the  distance  to  which  the  power  may  lie  trans- 
mitted is,  of  course,  the  unit  cost  of  energy  delivered.  To  a  considerable  degree  unit 
costs  are  less  as  quantities  increase.  Particularly  on  a  stream  like  the  Colorado, 
where,  irrespective  of  the  sixe  of  the  project,  large  preliminary  expenses  will  be 
involved  and  long  and  expensive  transmission  lines  will  be  required,  large-scale 
development  is  likely  to  prove  much  cheaper  in  construction  costs  per  unit  of  avail- 
able output  than  small-scale  development.  The  extent,  therefore,  to  which  the 
water  powers  of  the  Colorado  are  to  be  developed  and  the  degree  to  which  they  will 
be  made  to  serve  the  interests  of  the  Colorado  Basin  itself  are  likely  to  depend  largely, 
if  not  primarily,  upon  whether  the  power  is  developed  in  isolated  independent  units 
or  in  a  system  of  interconnected  plants  with  a  trsnamission  network  extending  '>ver 
the  entire  territory.  If  development  proceeds  by  independent  units,  a  few  re.-uicted 
areas  will  get  the  benefit  of  such  part  of  the  resources  as  are  developed.  If  the  other 
plan  is  followed  the  entire  basin  and  all  the  adjacent  territory  may  share  in  t  he  1  .ene.  (its. 
Such  a  plan,  however,  can  be  carried  out  only  by  agencies  whose  authority  is  not 
circumscribed  by  State  lines — agencies  in  whose  own  interest  it  will  be  to  extemi  as 
widely  as  possible  the  territory  which  they  serve.  Such  a  plan  does  not  necessarily 


188  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

imply  either  a  single  ownership,  and  it  does  not  imply  Government  ownership;  but 
it  does  imply  such  an  interrelationship,  at  least,  as  will  insure  the  operation  in  one 
interconnected  system  of  the  power  developments  on  the  Colorado  River. 

We  come  now  to  a  brief  consideration  of  what  we  have  called  the  political  rela 
tions  of  the  problem.  Under  the  provisions  of  the  Federal  water  power  act.  appli 
cants  for  license  must  present  evidence  of  having  secured  from  the  State  rights  nec- 
essary for  the  diversion  and  use  of  water.  It  is  the  general  rule  of  law  within  the 
Colorado  Basin  that  he  who  first  puts  the  waters  of  a  stream  to  use  has  a  first  right 
in  their  use.  On  this  doctrine  of  priority  of  appropriation .  extensive  rights  to  the 
use  of  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  have  been  acquired  on  the  lower  river,  for  it  is  that, 
section  of  the  river  which  is  being  the  most  rapidly  developed.  The  fear  has  con- 
sequently arisen  in  the  States  in  the  upper  section  that,  before  the  time  when  thev 
can  put  what  they  believe  is  their  share  of  the  water  to  use.  rights  to  such  share  will 
have  been  acquired  on  the  lower  river,  particularly  if  power  developments  utilizing 
the  full  flow  of  the  stream  should  be  authorized  on  the  middle  or  lower  river.  Because 
of  this  fear  and  in  the  hope  that  the  matter  might  be  settled  without  the  endless 
interstate  litigation  that  would  otherwise  be  almost  inevitable,  a  proposal  was  made 
that  the  several  States  affected  enter  into  a  treaty  or  compact  by  which  they  should 
mutually  agree  on  the  apportionment  among  themselves  of  the  waters  of  the  river. 
Under  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution,  such  a  compact  or  agreement  between 
States  requires  the  assent  of  Congress.  This  assent  was  given  by  act  of  Congress  of 
August  19,  1921,  which  authorized  the  creation  of  a  commission  to  be  composed  of 
one  representative  from  each  of  the  seven  interested  States,  who,  together  with  a 
member  appointed  by  the  President,  should  form  a  compact  ccmmissicn,  and  should 
report  their  conclusions  to  Congress  on  or  before  January  1.  1923.  This  ccmmisi-ii  n 
has  been  appointed  with  Secretary  Hoover  as  the  representative  of  the  United  States 
and  chairman,  has  held  several  sessions,  but  has  thus  far  come  to  no  agreement. 
Under  the  terms  of  the  act  creating  the  comrnissicn.  its  authority  is  limited  to  the 
determination  of  an  "equitable  division  and  apportionment "  of  the  waters  of  the 
river  among  the  States.  It  has  no  authority  to  grant  rights  itself,  and  its  powers 
do  not  conflict  with  those  of  the  Federal  Power  Commission  or  other  Federal  or  State 
agencies.  Since,  however,  its  conclusions  might  affect  or  be  affected  by  the  approval 
of  applications  by  the  Federal  Power  Commission,  action  upon  such  applications 
has  been  suspended  awaiting  the  conclusions  of  the  Colorado  River  Commission. 

There  are  also  international  relations  involved.  The  Colorado  RiA'er  forms  the 
boundary  between  the  southwestern  tip  of  Arizona  and  the  Mexican  State  of  Lower 
California.  Below  the  Arizona  line  it  separates  Lower  ( 'alifornia  from  Sonora.  Some 
100.000  acres  of  land  in  Mexico  are  now  being  irrigated  from  the  river,  and  it  is  esti- 
mated that  fiSO.OOO  additional  acres  are  irrigable,  a  total  of  820.000  acres  or  40  per  cent, 
of  the  irrigable  area  tributary  to  the  river  below  Boulder  Canyon.  Under  such  cir- 
cumstances it  is  manifest  that  international  comity,  if  no  other  reason,  requires  that 
this  situation  be  taken  fully  into  consideration  in  any  plans  of  Colorado  River  devel- 
opment. In  its  preliminary  report  on  the  problems  of  Imperial  Valley  and  vicinity 
of  January,  1921,  the  Reclamation  Sendee  recommended  equitable  participation  by 
the  Mexican  Government  in  the  cost  of  storage  works,  and  arrangements  with  that 
Government  for  the  construction  and  maintenance  of  flood  protection  works  on  Mexi- 
can soil.  Such  participation  and  arrangements  could,  of  course,  be  brought  about 
only  by  the  concurrent  action  of  the  two  Governments. 

There  is  also  the  question  of  the  degree  to  which  the  United  States  should  itself 
take  part  in  power  or  other  developments  along  the  river.  It  is  argued,  and  with 
apparent,  justification,  that  the  cost  of  flood  and  irrigation  storage  is  greater  than  the 
irrigation  interests  alone  can  bear  and  that,  therefore,  the  Government  should  itself 
construct  the  works  and  recoup  itself  by  sale  of  power,  some  (iOO.OOO  horsepower  of 
which  could  be  developed  at  Boulder  Canyon.  Whether  this  arrangement  would  or 
would  not  effect  an  equitable  distribution  of  benefits  among  irrigators  and  power  con- 
sumers. I  am  not  prepared  to  say. 

There  are.  furthermore,  those  who  advocate  development  at  Government  expense 
of  all  the  powers  along  the  Colorado  River,  the  distribution  of  such  power  by  the  Gov- 
ernment at  cost,  and  the  prohibition  of  any  development  by  private  capital  on  the 
river.  This  is,  of  course,  merely  an  instance  of  the  age-long  contest  between  advo- 
cates of  public  and  of  private  ownership  and  operation.  On  account,  however,  of 
the  probability  that  it  may  be  found  necessary  that  the  Government  participate  in 
the  development  of  the  river  at  least  to  the  extent  of  furnishing  flood  protection, 
general  action  is  unlikely  to  be  taken  upon  the  applications  before  the  Federal  Power 
Commission  until  conclusions  have  been  reached  upon  the  extent,  if  any,  to  which 
the  Government  should  thus  participate. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  189 

Finally,  agreement  among  the  several  interested  agencies  should  be  reached  on  the 
general  procedure  and  the  general  plan  of  development  to  be  followed  on  the  river, 
in  order  that  whatever  work  is  done  or  projects  constructed  may  n't  into  a  scheme  for 
the  fullest  practicable  utilization  of  the  river  for  all  uses  to  which  its  waters  are  adapted . 
There  is  an  apparent  existing  need  for  additional  power  in  certain  sections  within  the 
lia.-in.  The  several  interested  agencies  should,  therefore,  reach  their  conclusions  at 
the  earliest  practicable  date  so  that  the  present  order  of  suspension  may  be  lifted. 

The  primary  elements  of  a  general  plan  for  river  development  appears  to  be  as  fol- 
lows: (!•)  storage  at  the  headwaters  for  irrigation  in  the  upper  section  and  for  such 
power  developernent  in  this  section  as  can  be  accomplished  without  undue  interfer- 
ence with  irrigation;  (2)  storage  below  the  San  Juan  of  sufficient  capacity  to  control 
floods  and  to  regulate  the*  water  available  at  that  point  for  power  use  in  the  middle 
section;  and  (3)  storage  below  the  Virgin  sufficient,  at  least,  for  re-regulation  to  meet  irri- 
gation requirements  of  the  lower  river  and  for  such  additional  flood  protection  as  may 
be  necessary  or  desirable.  If  this  or  some  similar  plans  can  be  agreed  upon,  and  an 
equitable  apportionment  of  the  waters  effected,  the  details  of  the  immediate  applica- 
tion of  the  waters  of  the  river  to  their  respective  uses  in  the  individual  sections  will  be 
greatly  simplified,  and  work  may  be  started  on  the  series  of  developments  upon  which 
the  economic  progress  of  the  whole  Southwest  primarily  depends. 

:  Whereupon,  at  11.25  o'clock  a.  m.,  the  committee  adjourned  until  10.30  o'clock 
a.  m.,  Wednesday,  June  28,  1922.) 


PROTECTION  AND  DEVELOPMENT   OF 
LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN 


HEARINGS 


BEFORE  THE 


COMMITTEE  ON 
IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS 


SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGRESS 
SECOND  SESSION 

ON 

H.  R.  11449 

.  By  Mr.  SWING 

A  BILL  ,TO  PROVIDE  FOR  THE  PROTECTION  AND  DEVELOPMENT 
OF  THE  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN 


PART  4 


JUNE  28,  1922 


WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT  PRINTING  OFFICE 
131fi  1922 


3V3CI 

5!  OQAflC 


Vfi 

. 

COMMITTEE  ON  IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS. 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES. 
SIXTY-SEVENTH  CONGRESS,  SECOND  SESSION. 

MOSES  P.  KINKAID,  Nebraska,  Chairman. 

NICHOLAS  J.'SINNOTT,  Oregon.  CARL  HAYDEN,  Arizona. 

EDWARD  C.  LITTLE,  Kansas.  C.  B.  HUDSPETH,  Texas. 

ADDISON  T.  SMITH,  Idaho.  JOHN  E.  RAKER,  California. 

JOHN  W.  SUMMERS,  Washington.  HOMER  L.  LYON,  North  Carolina. 

HENRY  E.  BARBOUR,  California.  WILLIAM  B.  BANKHEAD,  Alabama. 

E.  O.  LEATHERWOOD,  Utah. 
WILLIAM  WILLIAMSON,  South  Dakota. 
SAMUEL  S.  ARENTZ,  Nevada. 
MANUEL  HERRICK,  Oklahoma. 

A.  R.  HUMPHREY,  Clerk. 

II 


PROTECTION  AND  DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO 

RIVER  BASIN. 


COMMITTEE  ox  IRRIGATION  OF  ARID  LANDS, 

HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES, 

Wednesday,  June  28,  1922. 

The  committee  met  at  10.30  o'clock  a.  m.,  Hon.  Edward  C.  Little  (acting 
chairman)  presiding. 

STATEMENT   OF   HON.    LAWRENCE   C.   PHIPPS,   A   UNITED   STATES 
SENATOR  FROM  THE  STATE  OF  COLORADO. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  wish  to  file  with  the  committee  a  copy  of  a 
telegram  received  by  Senator  Nicholson  and  myself  from  the  mayor  of  Denver. 
Colo.,  expressing  a  desire  on  the  part  of  the  citizens  of  Denver  to  be  heard 
before  any  final  action  was  taken  on  this  bill,  or  before  the  hearings  were 
closed. 

.Mr.  VAII.E.  I  have  filed  a  similar  telegram. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  It  is  not  necessary  to  read  it  now,  but  I  will  file  it  with  the 
committee. 

(The  telegram  referred  to  is  as  follows:) 

DENVER.  COLO.,  June  23,  1!>.>2. 
Hon.  LAWRENCE  C.  PHIPPS, 
Hon.  SAMUEL  D.  NICHOLSON. 

Washington.  D.  C.: 

Our  attention  just  called  to  H.  R.  11449  by  Congressman  Swing  and  S.  3511  by 
Senator  Johnson  and  to  hearings  on  same  before  House  committee.  The  future 
growth  and  development  of  Denver  and  vicinity,  as  well  as  nearly  one-half  the 
total  area  of  the  State  of  Colorado,  are  and  will  be  wholly  dependent  upon  the 
future  use  of  a  part  of  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  River  which  have  their  rise 
in  this  State,  and  we  protest-  against  any  legislation  by  Congress  for  the  con- 
struction of  enormous  works  upon  the  lower  reaches  of  the  river  which  may 
interfere  with  the  future  development  of  the  State  of  Colorado  and  the  neces- 
sary future  diversions  for  municipal  and  irigation  supplies  by  Denver  and  ad- 
joining territory.  The  bills  in  question  do  not  afford  such  protection.  The 
consideration  of  such  legislation  at  this  time  is  a  surprise  to  us  in  view  of  the 
present  activity  respecting  the  same  subject  matter  by  the  interstate  compact 
commission  appointed  by  the  President  and  the  governors  of  the  seven  Colorado 
River  States,  and  we  protest  against  further  activities  by  Congress  until  the 
future  rights  of  this  State  and  city  have  been  assured  by  interstate  compact. 
In  any  legislation  on  this  subject  adequate  provision  should  be  made  for  lower 
development  for  vise  of  States  in  the  upper  basin  as  well  as  the  lower  basin. 
Before  any  report  is  made  on  this  bill  Denver  desires  time  and  opportunity 
to  be  heard. 

D.  C.  BAU.F.Y,  Mui/ur. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  My  attention  has  been  called  to  the  Swing  bill,  which,  as 
I  understand  it,  is  practically  a  duplicate  of  a  bill  introduced  in  the  Senate 
by  Senator  Johnson,  of  California,  but  I  have  not  had  an  opportunity  to  see 
the  hearings  that  have  been  so  far  conducted  by  your  committee.  Therefore. 
I  am  not  aware  as  to  what  interests  are  behind  the  proponents  of  this  measure, 
but  so  far. as  rny  personal  information  is  concerned — and  I  have  made  some 
inquiries — I  have  been  unable  to  learn  of  any  community  of  citizens  in  the 
Imperial  Valley  or  the  Coachella  Valley  of  California  who  are  asking  for  the 
construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon  Dam  at  this  time. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  can  briefly  tell  you  who  has  appeared  here. 

191 


192  DEVELOPMENT   OF    LOWER    COLORADO    RIVER    BASIX. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  can  post  myself  later  with  regard  to  thar. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Director  Davis,  of  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service,  made 
a  statement  based  upon  his  printed  report  on  the  problems  of  the  Imperial 
Valley,  which,  undoubtedly,  you  have  seen.  Secretary  Hoover,  of  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce,  appeared  before  the  committee,  and  discussed  the  bill. 
There  have  also  been  present  representatives  of  the  City  of  Los  Angeles, 
Pasadena,  Riverside,  and  other  cities  and  towns  in  Southern  California,  us  well 
as  the  President  of  the  Imperial  Irrigation  District,  all  of  whom  advocated  the 
passage  of  the  Swing  bill.  Mr.  Yager,  representing  the  Coachella  Valley,  is 
present  this  morning  and  desires  to  be  heard. 

I  can  further  advise  you  that  this  is  the  last  day  on  which  hearings  are  to 
be  held  on  the  bill  at  this  time.  The  committee  may  again  take  the  bill  up  for 
consideration  after  the  proposed  recess  of  the  House,  sometime  in  August  or 
September,  at  which  time,  as  I  have  advised  everyone  who  has  asked  me,  the 
committee  will  undoubtedly  be  glad  to  hear  at  length  all  persons  having  views 
on  the  bill. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  Mr.  Chairman.  I  do  not  change  my  statement  at  all  that 
upon  inquiry  I  am  not  aware  of  any  community  of  citizens  in  California  who 
are  asking  .for  action  at  this  time  on  any  measure  of  this  character,  and  I  sub- 
mit that  since  the  various  Staves  that  are  interested  in  the  waters  of  the  Colo- 
rado River  have  appointed  commissioners,  who,  in  conjunction  with  the  Federal 
representative,  Mr.  Hoover,  acting  as  chairman  of  the  commission,  are  consider- 
ing the  matter  of  the  allocation  of  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  River,  iv  would  be 
very  strange  indeed  if  the  Federal  Government  should  be  making  an  appropria- 
tion of  some  $70,000,000  to  enable  one  community  or  one  section  of  the  country 
that  can  use  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  River  for  irrigation  purposes  to  set  up 
a  prior  claim  or  right  by  the  use  of  those  wavers  while  these  negotiations  are  in 
progress.  Of  course.  I  have  no  idea  that  any  affirmative  legislation  can  be  had 
at  this  time,  nor  do  I  think  that  any  legislation  should  be  had  until  the  possi- 
bilities of  other  reservoir  sites  on  the  Colorado  River  are  considered  in  connec- 
tion with  the  Boulder  Canyon  site. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  I  might  say  that  the  suggestion  you  have  made  has  already  been 
made  to  the  committee,  and  the  committee,  I  think,  is  fully  convinced  of  every 
proposition  you  advance. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  Without  having  had  an  opportunity  to  know  what  has  already 
passed  before  your  committee — 

Mr.  LITTLE  (interposing).  I  think  if  you  will  read  over  the  hearings,  you  will 
find  that  the  situation  is  satisfactory  in  that  regard. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  would  like  to  point  out  vbis  fact,  that  the  committee  should 
give  consideration  to  all  those  other  matters  in  connection  with  this  bill. 

Mi-.  LITTI.K.  I  am  sure  that  you  would  be  satisfied  with  what  has  been  done 
by  the  committee. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  The  principal  object  of  this  bill,  or  that  would  be.  at  least, 
inferred  from  a  reading  of  it,  is  the  control  of  flood  waters,  with  the  incidental 
use  of  them  for  irrigation  purposes  and  for  the  development  of  hydroelectric 
power.  Now.  the  great  damage  which  occurred  in  the  Imperial  Valley  by  rea- 
son of  the  flood  some  years  ago  when  the  Southern  Pacific  Railroad  saved  the 
situation,  and  for  which.  I  believe,  it  has  never  been  reimbursed  by  the  Federal 
(Government,  was  caused,  according  to  my  information,  by  an  unusual  flood  in 
the  Gila  River,  which  comes  into  the  Colorado  River  below  the  Boulder  Canyon 
Dam  Site.  The  high  flow  of  this  present  season  which  has  just  passed  within 
the  present  month,  did  not  come  out  of  the  Gila,  River  but  from  the  upper  wa- 
ters. By  reason  of  the  Pescadero  Cut,  which  has  been  reopened  at  an  expend- 
iture of  some  $300.000  by  the  people  of  the  Imperial  Valley,  the  flood  waters 
were  safely  carried  by  without  danger  of  inundation  to  the  Imperial  Valley. 
This  bill  has,  among  other  provisions,  one  giving  priority  in  the  matter  of  de- 
veloping hydroelectric  power  possibilities  to  communities,  which  would,  to  my 
mind,  have  the  effect  of  cutting  out  competition  on  the  part  of  public-utility 
companies,  such  as  the  large  companies  now  supplying  California  and  Nevada 
with  hydroelectric  power. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Would  you  object  to  my  asking  you  a  personal  question  at  this 
time? 

Senator  PHIPPS.  No. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  have  been  told  that  you  have  considerable  financial  interest 
yourself  in  the  California  power  companies.  Is  that  true? 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  193 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  am  interested,  and  have  been  for  years,  in  one  of  the 
smaller  companies  out  there,  and  in  a  company  that,  by  the  way,  has  furnished 
hydroelectric  power  to  the  Imperial  Valley. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  What  company  is  that? 

Senator  PHIPPS.  The  Nevada  and  California  Electrical  Corporation.  I  think 
they  furnish  the  Imperial  Valley  with  current  through  one  of  their  subsidiaries, 
either  the  Holton  Power  Co.,  or  the  Southern  Sierra  Power  Co.  I  am  not 
familiar  with  the  details  of  the  business,  because  I  have  no  part  in  the  man- 
agement, but  it  goes  without  saying  that  having  established  distribution  lines 
in  there,  any  further  development  of  hydroelectric  power  in  that  neighborhood 
would  put  that  company  in  an  ideal  position,  as  it  would  benefit  through  being 
allotted  its  proportionate  share  of  the  hydroelectric  power  developed. 

Mr.  SWING.  You  are  short  of  power  now,  are  you  not? 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  do  not  think  so. 

Mr.  SWING.  In  other  words,  there  is  more  demand  than  you  can  supply? 

Senator  PHIPPS.  Like  every  other  company  out  there,  they  have  not  been 
able  to  keep  up  with  the  demand  for  hydroelectric  power.  There  is  an  absolute 
field  for  further  development  of  that  industry  there  and  in  all  the  other 
Western  States.  At  the  present  time  agriculture,  perhaps,  is  the  field  upon 
which  those  companies  depend  for  their  greatest  consumption — that  is,  in  pump- 
ing for  irrigation  purposes.  New  things  are  being  developed  all  the  time,  so 
that  really  the  hydroelectric  business  is  only  in  its  infancy.  There  will  be  a 
growing  and  ever-increasing  demand  for  power,  and  I  think  we  are  only  on 
the  eve  of  that  development.  So  far  as  that  is  concerned,  I  think  the  possi- 
bilities of  the  Colorado  River  should  be  carefully  considered,  and  that  they 
should  be  developed,  but  we  must  be  careful  to  develop  them  along  proper  lines. 
I  do  not  want  to  see  Los  Angeles,  with  its  very  apparent  desire — and  I  say  that 
unhesitatingly — to  bond  its  citizens  for  the  purpose,  going  into  the  hydro- 
electric j tower  business,  in  competition  with  public  utility  companies,  which  com- 
panies are  financed  by  private  resources. 

Mr.  SWING.  There  is  no  competition  by  the  city  of  Los  Angeles,  is  there? 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  am  not  sufficiently  posted  to  say,  but  my  information  is 
that  they  bought  out  public  utility  companies  that  had  put  in  distributing  lines 
by  which  they  were  furnishing  current  to  citizens  of  the  city,  where,  as  in 
ether  States,  they  were  under  the  regulation  of  the  railroad  commission.  Where 
their  earnings  are  regulated,  they  are  not  allowed  to  earn  above  a  certain 
percentage  on  their  investment,  based  upon  the  appraised  value  of  their  prop- 
erty, with  a  certain  amount  set  aside  for  depreciation,  etc.  Therefore,  the 
consumers  were  protected  in  the  matter  of  charges.  Now,  in  this  Boulder 
Canyon  proposition,  it  seems  to  me  very  apparent  that  there  is  a  definite  intent 
and  purpose  on  the  part  of  the  administration  of  Los  Angeles  to  definitely 
establish  the  city  of  Los  Angeles,  a  municipality,  in  the  business  of  develop- 
ing, producing,  and  distributing  hydroelectric  power  in  competition  with  public- 
utility  corporations,  whose  earnings  are  regulated  by  the  commission. 

Mr.  HAYUKN.  I  am  sure  that  you  will  be  interested  in  reading  the  state- 
ment before  this  committee  made  by  Mr.  Crisswell,  the  president  of  the  City 
Council  of  Lets  Angeles,  in  which  he  discussed  that  very  feature. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  am  sure  that  I  shall  not  miss  reading  a  page  of  the 
testimony. 

The  people  of  Denver  in  the  development  of  their  city  will  have  to  look 
to  the  waters  of  what  we  term  the  western  slope,  or  the  Western  part  of  the 
State,  over  the  divide,  to  supplement  the  water  needed  for  domestic  purposes 
in  the  city  of  Denver  eventually.  At  the  present  time,  it  is  proper  and  urgent 
that  they  should  be  looking  ahead,  as  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  did  when  it 
went  200  to  2.~tO  miles  in  the  interior  tit  take  up  water  rights.  If  the  city 
of  Denver  should  look  ahead  with  a  view  to  acquiring  water,  it  would  have 
to  be  diverted  on  the  headwaters  of  the  Colorado  River. 

Mr.  HAYDKN.  I  presume  that  the  question  of  the  diversion  of  water  out- 
side of  the  basin  will  be  considered  by  the  Colorado  River  Commission  before 
it  reaches  any  final  conclusion  as  to  the  allocation  of  the  waters  of  thsit 
stream. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  Undoubtedly  :  that  is  one  of  the  problems  that  must  be 
attended  to  out  there.  So  far  as  that  is  concerned,  my  feeling  personally  is 
that  there  should  be  no  difficulty  on  the  part  of  the  States  getting  together 
in  u  proper  agreement  for  the  allocation  of  the  waters  of  that  stream.  So 
far  as  Colorado  is  concerned,  and  I  believe  that  Wyoming  is  in  the  smne  sit- 


194  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

uation,  the  volume  of  water  carried  through  those  States  is  largely  in  excess 
of  what  either  or  both  Stares  can  expert  to  use  under  any  future  plans  that 
any  man  living  to-day  can  devise. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Did  you  say  Colorado  and  Utah? 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  said  Colorado  and  Wyoming.  I  would  not  like  to  say 
as  to  Utah.  Utah  is  a  little  farther  down  the  stream.  It  is  a  great  and 
growing  State,  with  wonderful  agricultural  possibilities,  and  I  do  not  know 
to  what  extent  its  territory  can  be  irrigated  by  water  from  the  Colorado 
River. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  What  do  you  think  of  the  Glen  Canyon  irrigation  project  in 
Utah? 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  do  not  know  about  that.  There  is  one  strong  reason  for 
developing  the  waters  at  the  head  of  the  stream  for  beneficial  use.  and  that  is 
because  the  water  goes  back  into  the  river  through  seepage.  The  return  flow 
to  the  stream  is  very  great.  In  the  San  Luis  Valley,  in  Colorado,  at  the  head- 
waters of  the  Rio  Grande.  I  can  show  you  places  where  the  water,  after  having 
irrigated  large  areas  of  land,  requires  sulnlrainage  in  order  to  take  it  away. 
There  are  many  places  where  water  which  has  already  irrigated  land  is  brought 
to  the  surface  and  used  again  for  the  irrigation  of  other  lands,  and  then  goes 
into  the  river. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  How  far  down  from  the  dam? 

Senator  PHIPPS.  For  instance,  up  at  the  headwaters  of  the  Rio  Grande,  there 
is  the  so-called  farmers'  dam,  which  is  less  than  half  a  mile  wide,  impounding  a 
vast  volume  of  water.  There  is  another  dam  on  one  of  the  main  tributaries, 
known  as  the  Santa  Maria  Dam.  which  is  away  up  in  the  hills.  At  certain 
times,  when  they  desire  to  irrigate,  they  take  the  water  out  through  the  liead- 
gates  into  the  river  channel.  The  water  is  conducted  down  to  the  point  where 
they  take  it  out  for  use.  For  instance,  the  town  of  Del  Xorte  is  between  75 
and  100  miles  farther  down  the  stream  than  the  farmers'  dam  and  (><>  miles 
below  the  Santa  Maria  Dam.  They  there  turn  the  water  into  the  main  ditches. 
which  are  as  wide  as  the  length  of  this  room,  say  30  feet.  That  is  the  width 
of  one  of  those  principal  ditches,  and  they  range  in  depth  from  5  to  7  feet. 
Perhaps  6  feet  is  the  average. 

They  take  the  water  out  into  the  laterals  and  distribute  it  over  the  territory, 
and  in  covering  an  area  of  three  miles  square  they  will  get  enough  drop  or 
enough  dip  of  the  land  to  take  the  underflow  out  again  and  bring  it  to  the  top 
of  the  land.  Then  it  will  go  3  or  4  miles  farther,  and  find  its  way  back  into 
the  stream.  That  water  is  used  over  and  over  again.  I  am  familiar  with  the 
fact  that  in  irrigation  there  are  great  losses  through  evaporation.  That  is  gen- 
erally conceded,  but,  at  the  same  time,  there  is  a  great  recovery  through  seepage 
and  the  return  of  the  water  to  the  stream.  So  in  the  case  of  Glen  Canon.  Utah, 
the  amount  of  water  that  would  be  taken  out  would  irrigate  the  Utah  lands,  and 
a  portion  of  the  water  would  return  to  the  main  channel  of  the  stream. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  The  Glen  Canon  Dam  site  is  located  in  Arizona,  instead  of  Utah, 
and  there  is  no  irrigable  land  in  Utah  below  it. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  am  confusing  that  with  another  site  in  Utah. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  I  think  that  you  must  have  in  mind  the  Flaming  Gorge  Project 
which  has  been  highly  recommended  by  some  eminent  engineers. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  There  are  several  reservoir  sites  further  up  the  Colorado, 
and  I  believe  the  experts  on  irrigation  problems  would  generally  testify  that  the 
greatest  benefit  that  can  be  derived  from  water  for  irrigation  purposes  is  by 
beginning  its  use  as  nearly  as  possible  to  the  headwaters. 

Mr.  LITTLE,  I  was  talking  about  this  project  in  Utah. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  will  not  detain  the  committee  any  further,  except  to  sa.T 
that  in  a  matter  of  this  kind  it  is  very  necessary  to  take  into  account  all  of  tin- 
questions  that  enter  into  the  consideration  of  the  subject  rather  than  to  con- 
fine your  investigations  to  the  possibilities  of  one  project. 

Mr.  SWING.  May  I  make  this  suggestion,  that  I  am  going  to  ask  the  com- 
mittee at  the  first  opportunity  after  the  recess,  probably  the  last  of  August  or 
the  1st  of  September,  to  have  the  hearings  printed  and  a  copy  sent  to  the  Colo- 
rado River  Commissioners  and  other  persons  interested  in  the  matter,  with 
an  announcement  of  the  date  of  the  future  hearings.  Then  they  can  read 
the  hearings  and  have  the  advantage  of  preparing  their  statements  in  relation 
to  them,  and  they  can  be  here  at  that  time  to  present  their  case  to  the  committee. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  That  would  be  the  ideal  way  in  which  the  committee  mem- 
bers could  get  the  information  they  want. 


DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  195 

Mr.  SWING.  I  think  you  will  agree  with  me  that  the  development  of  the  Colo- 
rado River  is  one  of  the  biggest  propositions  before  the  American  people  to-day. 
It  is  simply  a  question  of  evolving  a  workable  scheme. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  You  spoke  of  the  power  possibilities  of  this  stream :  There 
is  a  dam  site  above  the  Grand  Canyon  as  well  as  below  it.  ^  There  is  a  dam  site 
at  the  junction  of  the  Grand  and  Green  Rivers  where  the  hydroelectric  power 
that  might  be  generated  would  be  more  centrally  located  with  reference  to  the 
points  of  use  than  would  be  the  case  if  it  were  generated  at  the  Boulder  Canyon 
site. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Mr.  Swing,  will  you  point  out  to  the  Senator  where  the  projects 
are?  Will  you  point  out  the  Flaming  Gorge  Project  to  him  on  the  map?  • 

Mr.  SWING.  I  think  the  Senator  is  about  as  familiar  with  that  as  I  am. 
Here  [indicating}  is  the  Flaming  Gorge  Site,  and  here  [indicating]  is  the 
Boulder  Canyon  Site. 

Senator  PHIPPS.  I  do  not  know  that  I  have  anything  further  to  say  this 
morning.  I  thank  the  committee  for  its  attention. 

STATEMENT   OF  HON.   SAMUEL  D.  NICHOLSON,  A  UNITED  STATES 
SENATOR  FROM  THE  STATE  OF  COLORADO. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  Mr.  Chairman,  of  course,  it  is  agreed  by  everybody  that 
the  distribution  of  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  River  presents  quite  a  problem, 
and  I  take  it  that  there  will  be  no  money  appropriated  by  Congress  until  the 
Colorado  River  Commission  makes  its  report.  I  feel  quite  confident  that  there 
will  be  no  measure  enacted  by  the  Senate  appropriating  money  for  the  pur- 
pose of  building  the  Boulder  Canon  Dam  until  such  time  as  the  Commission 
makes  its  report. 

Mr.  SWING.  It  was  suggested  by  Mr.  Hoover  that  an  appropriate  paragraph 
could  be  put  into  the  bill  protecting  the  upper  stream  States,  and  not  continue 
to  carry  as  a  hangover  several  projects  in  California  and  Arizona  that  are  con- 
stantly menaced  by  Hoods,  such  as  was  experienced  in  the  Palo  Verde  Valley. 
You  know  of  the  destructive  floods  there. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  That  is  true  from  what  I  have  read. 

Mr.  SWING.  You  could  have  your  rights  protected  by  a  reservation  in  the 
bill  that  when  the  commission  reaches  an  agreement,  that  agreement  shall 
cover  the  projects  authorized  to  be  constructed  in  this  bill. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  If  an  agreement  that  would  protect  our  rights  on  the 
Colorado  River  could  be  arrived  at  we  would  not  want  in  any  manner  to  prevent 
the  construction  of  a  dam. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  mean  if  the  legislation  carried  a  paragraph  which  provided 
that  when  the  Colorado  River  Commission  readied  an  agreement  that  agree- 
ment should  govern  all  the  works  constructed  hereumler.  Would  not  that 
be  sufficient? 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  No,  I  do  not  think  so.  I  would  not  want  to  say  that 
I  would  agree  to  that,  or  that  we  would  bind  ourselves  to  accept  the  findings 
of  this  commission  as  final.  That  would  be  a  question  of  whether  we  felt 
that  our  interests  had  been  properly  protected. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  mean  if  it  is  ratified.  Of  course,  you  are  acquainted  with  the 
Hood  menace  down  there? 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  Yes. 

Mr.  SWING.  And  you  know  that  it  is  a  real  and  actual  menace. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  1  agree  that  we  are  making  pretty  rapid  progress  now, 
and  that  the  appointment  of  this  commission  was  highly  desirable  and  neces- 
sary. Now  when  they  make  a  finding,  I  think  all  of  us  will  have  a  better 
viewpoint  from  which  to  see  what  our  relative  rights  are  in  the  matter. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Did  you  know  that  Mr.  Hoover,  the  chairman  of  that  commission, 
has  been  before  the  committee  and  has  quite  fully  presented  that  side  of  it? 

Senator  NICHOLSON.   I  did  not  know  that. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  He  made  quite  a  statement. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.   What  did  he  say? 

Mr.  SWING.  He  said  that  this  legislation  should  be  pui  through  without 
further  delay,  and  that  it  could  carry  a  paragraph  amply  protecting  all  up- 
stream situations. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  Where  is  this  paragraph? 

Mr.  SWING.  Mr.  Hoover  suggested  it. 

Mr.  VAILK.  The  bill  was  prepared  before  Mr.  Hoover  appeared  before  the 
committee. 


196  DEVELOPMENT   OF  LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIX. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  Let  us  look  at  it  from  another  viewpoint :  Suppose  we 
should  agree  to  the  proposition  that  you  gentlemen  have  submitted,  that  there 
should  be  such  a  saving  paragraph  in  the  bill,  binding  us  as  to  the  finding  of 
this  commission,  or  to  abide  by  its  findings 

Mr.  SWING  (interposing).  The  commission's  findings  can  only  be  binding 
when  unanimously  adopied  by  the  legislatures  of  the  seven  Stsites  concerned 
and  confirmed  by  the  action  of  Congiv 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  That  is  another  question  that  has  been  developed,  be- 
cause it  is  necessary  to  have  the  legislatures  of  the  seven  States  to  agree  to 
the  findings  of  the  commission  before  they  can  be  ratified  by  Congress. 

Mr.  SWING.  That  would  not  alter  your  rights. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  Now,  if  that  be  true,  and  I  have  no  doubt  it  is,  you 
can  readily  see  that  we  should  proceed  along  common-sense  lines.  We  must 
deal  with  one  another  in  an  honest,  just.  ;md  straightforward  manner.  It  must 
be  a  settlement  that  is  equitable  to  all  of  the  States,  or  they  will  not  adopt 
or  approve  the  findings  of  the  commission.  Therefore.  I  take  it  that  if  we 
work  along  together  and  attempt  to  help  one  another,  we  will  not  obstruct 
the  work  of  the  commission,  and  we  will  get  somewhere. 

Mr.  SWING.  You  have  kept  in  touch  with  this  matter,  have  you  not? 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  Not  as  closely  as  I  should  have  liked. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  mean  in  touch  with  the  work  of  the  Colorado  River  commission. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  Just  in  a  general  way. 

Mr.  SWING.  Do  you  not  recognize  from  the  hearings  that  the  principal  ob- 
struction to  the  reaching  of  :in  agreement  by  the  Colorado  River  commission 
has  been  the  contention  or  claim  on  the  part  of  representatives  of  States  that 
all  of  the  water  and  snow  that  fell  within  their  boundaries  in  the  basin  of  this 
river  belonged  to  them  forever — that  is,  water  that  they  could  not  possibly  use 
now,  and  could  not  possibly  use  100  years  from  now?  You  know,  of  course, 
that  that  was  their  contention,  and  that  has  been  the  reason  why  the  commis- 
sion could  not  reach  an  agreement. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  I  know  that  has  been  the  contention. 

Mr.  SWING.  You  do  not  defend  that  proposition  before  this  committee,  do  you? 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  I  can  tell  you  very  briefly  my  position  in  the  matter : 
As  you  gentlemen  know.  62  per  cent  or  64  per  cent  of  the  water  in  the  Colo- 
rado River  has  its  source  in  Colorado.  I  think  17  or  18  per  cent  of  it  has  its 
source  in  Wyoming.  In  other  words,  about  80  per  cent  of  the  water  in  the 
Colorado  is  furnished  by  Colorado  and  Wyoming.  The  city  of  Denver  now  has 
a  population  of  nearly  300,000  people,  and  we  have  no  reserve  waters  upon 
which  to  fall  back  to  meet  the  future  increase  or  growth  of  the  city  of  Denver. 
Of  course,  naturally,  in  the  next  2.1  or  30  years  Denver  will  be  a  city  of  600.000 
people,  and  we  will  then  be  compelled  to  go  to  the  western  slope  and  get 
water  for  future  use.  Of  course,  it  is  quite  difficult  at  this  time  to  say  what 
quantity  of  water  is  going  to  be  required  for  the  future  use  of  the  city  of 
Denver,  but  the  citizens  of  Colorado  will  have  to  be  guaranteed,  or  they  will 
have  to  be  protected  in  their  full  rights,  as  to  the  quantity  of  water  that  they 
feel  the  future  will  require.  It  is  not  a  question  as  to  the  quantity  of  water 
that  we  will  require  to-day,  but  the  quantity  that  we  will  probably  require 
forty  or  fifty  years  hence,  based  on  increased  population.  That  relates  not 
only  to  the  needs  of  the  cities,  as  there  is  a  great  deal  of  land  in  Colorado 
that  is  available  for  reclamation  purposes,  and  it  can  be  reclaimed  by  irrigation 
when  the  waters  are  diverted  across  to  it,  either  from  the  Rio  Grande  River 
or  the  Colorado  River.  Now,  the  citizens  of  Colorado,  I  think,  can  be  relied 
upon  to  extend  to  you  people  a  square  deal.  All  that  they  ask  for  is  that  you 
extend  to  them  a  square  deal  in  the  matter.  That  is  the  way  I  look  at  the 
matter. 

STATEMENT  OF  HON.  WILLIAM  N.  VAILE,  MEMBER  OF  CONGRESS 
FROM  FIRST  COLORADO  DISTRICT. 

Mr.  VAILK.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  would  like  to  make  a  brief  statement  along  the 
same  line.  We  have  in  Colorado  four  principal  streams  that  rise  in  that  State, 
namely,  the  Platte.  the  Arkansas,  the  Rio  Grande,  which  flow  to  the  east,  and 
the  Colorado,  which  flows  to  the  west.  The  mountains  of  Colorado  furnish  a 
large  part  of  the  water  supply  for  that  whole  western  territory  on  both  slopes  of 
the  Rockies. 

Mr.  LITTLE.  Which  of  those  rivers  will  furnish  the  most  water  to  the  Colorado? 

Mr.  VAILE.  There  is  more  water  in  the  Colorado  River.    The  Rio  Grande  does 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  197 

not  stay  very  long  in  Colorado.  It  flows  southeast,  and  goes  out  of  the  State. 
The  people  of  Colorado  have  been  rather  injured  by  the  construction  of  works 
outside  of  the  State  which  have  established  priorities,  or,  at  least,  have  estab- 
lished equities,  in  the  judgment  of  the  Interior  Department. 

Mr.  HA  YUEN.  And,  also  in  the  judgment  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States. 

Mr.  VAILE.  Well,  it  has  worked  both  ways.  They  have  confirmed  the  doctrine 
of  prior  appropriation,  upon  which  we  rely.  They  decided  with  us  on  that  in 
the  Kansas  and  Colorado  case  and  against  us  in  the  Colorado  and  Wyoming  case. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  It  is  evident  from  the  Supreme  Court  decisions  that  if  an 
equitable  arrangement  could  be  made  between  the  several  States  of  the  Colorado 
River  Basin  that  it  would  be  highly  advantageous. 

Mr.  VAILK.  Yes;  ami  that  was  the  purpose  of  the  law  providing  for  that  com- 
pact between  the  several  States.  In  the  first  place,  there  was  a  treaty  with 
Mexico  that  guaranteed  the  flow.  I  do  not  know  the  exact  proportion,  but  the 
general  effect  was  to  guarantee  the  flow  of  water  along  the  boundary  line,  and 
under  that  treaty  irrigators  in  southeastern  Colorado  have  been  deprived  of 
water  to  which  they  are  justly  entitled  for  their  homesteads  which,  in  many 
cases,  were  located  before  the  treaty  with  Mexico  was  made,  or,  at  least,  at 
a  very  early  date.  Then  there  was  the  construction  of  the  Elephant-Butte 
Dam.  with  the  result  that  the  Hio  (irande  waters  have  been  tied  up  as  far  as 
their  use  by  Colorado  people  is  concerned.  Denver  is  a  city  of  more  than 
250,000  population,  and  is  growing  rapidly.  There  is  a  very  large  territory 
to  the  east  of  it. 

Mr.   SWING.  Is  it   agricultural  land? 

Mr.  VAILE.  Yes. 

Mr.  SWING.  You  want  to  divert  water  from  the  Colorado  River  for  the  irri- 
gation of  lands,  from  which  the  water  will  not  again  enter  the  river  by  seepage? 

Mr.  VAILE.  Certainly;  we  rely  upon  the  doctrine  of  prior  appropriation  to 
beneficial  use.  of  course,  there  are  two  extreme  views.  One  extreme  view  is 
that  a  State  is  entitled  to  all  the  water  that  rises  within  its  boundaries,  and 
the  other  is  that  the  State  through  which  the  water  flows  is  entitled  to  it.  Of 
course,  as  between  those  two  positions,  there  is  ground  for  reasonable  com- 
promise. 

Mr.  SWING.  If  the  State  of  Colorado  claims  all  of  the  water  that  flows  from 
within  its  boundaries,  let  them  pay  the  millions  of  dollars  of  damages  done  by 
those  waters  in  Hooding  the  I'alo  Verde  Valley. 

Mr.  VAILK.  They  do  not  claim  that  responsibility. 

Senator  NICHOLSON.  That  is  what  we  are  proposing  to  do — that  is.  to  take 
this  water  and  divert  its  course  so  that  you  will  not  be  damaged  by  floods  in 
the  river. 

Mr.  VAILE.  .We  do  rely  upon  that  doctrine  of  prior  appropriation  to  bene- 
ficial iise,  but  that  doctrine  will  evidently  have  to  have  some  modification  in 
the  interest  of  States  below  as  well  as  States  above,  wherever  State  lines  in- 
tervene. That  can  be  worked  out  through  agreements  among  the  seven  States 
interested.  I  do  not  know  that  the  city  of  Denver  will  oppose  this  legislation, 
but  we  do  want  to  be  sure  that  rights  shall  not.  be  acquired  before  an  agree- 
ment is  reached  among  the  States. 

STATEMENT     OF     MB.     EDGAR     WALLACE,     LEGISLATIVE     REPRE- 
SENTATIVE OF  THE  AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR. 

Mr.  WALLACE.  Mr.  Chairman,  sometime  ago  I  appeared  before  this  com- 
mittee on  a  general  reclamation  bill.  It  was  the  Smith-McNary  bill  and  the 
Bankhead  bill  that  were  pending  before  the  committee  at  that  time.  I  then 
stated  the  general  position  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  on  matters  of 
reclamation.  Since  that  time  a  committee  has  been  appointed  by  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor,  and  they  made  a  report  which  has  been  adopted.  With 
your  permission.  I  would  like  to  read  one  paragraph  from  the  report,  and  will 
insert  the  balance  of  it  in  the  hearing. 

Mr.  LITTLE.   Without  objection,  the  report  will  be  included  in  the  hearing. 

Mr.  WALLACE.  The  paragraph  definitely  pertainim:  to  the  bill  before  the 
committee  is  headed  "The  Colorado."  ami  reads  as  follows: 

"The  possibilities  of  the  Colorado  system  dial  lenses  adequate  description. 
Immense  tracts  of  land,  the  richest  in  the  world,  can  throughout  this  valley 
and  the  deserts,  be  brought  under  a  hiirh  state  of  cultivation  which  will  neces- 
sitate towns  and  cities,  manufacturing  and  railroads,  as  the  development 
continues. 


198  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

"  The  reclamation  of  desert  and  swamp,  the  building  of  good  roads  and  canals. 
and  adequate  housing  plans  might  well  absorb  our  attention  and  interest  MS 
in  these  crucial  times.  That  nation  that  can  build,  while  other  nations  decay, 
is  the  nation  that  will  endure." 

Now.  Mr.  Chairman,  that  last  phrase,  of  course,  "the  nation  that  can  build 
while  other  nations  decay,"  is  the  crux  of  the  matter,  according  to  our  ideas. 
The  American  Federation  of  Labor  recogni/es  that  to-day  there  is  a  vast  amount 
of  unemployment,  even  though  there  is  a  little  betterment  on  account  of  the 
farmers  getting  a  little  better  price  for  their  products.  We  know,  gentlemen, 
that  then-  are  millions  of  men  unemployed.  I  call  your  attention  to  the  fact 
that  the  coal  miners  have  been  on  strike  for  almost  three  months,  and  yet 
there  is  no  shortage  of  coal.  What  does  that  mean?  It  means  that  the  indus- 
tries are  not  running,  or  they  would  have  absorbed  that  amount  of  coal  that 
was  on  hand  long  ago.  Therefore,  as  I  have  said,  there  are  many  millions  of 
men  out  of  employment.  We  see  in  every  project  for  the  reclamation  of  land 
possibilities  for  homes  and  possibilities  for  other  industries  in  other  sections 
of  the  country  that  will  be  called  upon  to  furnish  the  materials  for  building 
dams,  for  building  homes,  and  for  building  the  railroads  that  will  go  into  those 
possible  reclamation  projects. 

Now,  we  favor  this  project,  as  we  do  the  others  referred  to.  We  see  the 
extreme  necessity  and  the  evidence  that  there  is  not  only  possible  the  reclama- 
tion of  more  land,  but  there  is  danger  at  the  present  time  of  homes  already 
built  and  to  land  already  reclaimed  of  be'ng  destroyed.  It  would  intensify 
the  situation  throughout  the  country  if  that  calamity  should  come  to  pas*. 
It  seems  to  us  that  at  a  time  like  this  speed  is  necessary.  The  opportunity 
is  here  and  the  necessity  is  here.  Men  should  be  given  an  opportunity  to  build 
homes,  and  men  should  be  put  to  work.  Our  foreign  relations  are  out  of  joint, 
and  our  foreign  trade  is  out  of  joint.  Why  should  we  not  now  put  all  of  our 
energies  into  developing  this  country,  and  making  this  a  happy  country  for 
working  people,  with  an  opportunity  to  employ  themselves  and  to  employ  each 
other?  Is  it  a  question  of  economy V  Yes:  but  I  do  not  think  it  is  good 
economy  to  save  money  at  the  cost  of  the  people  of  this  country  who  arc  looking 
for  work,  while  there  is  urgent  need  for  the  work  that  they  can  do.  I  do  not 
believe  that  we  should  hesitate  to  mortgage  the  future  for  the  benefit  of  pros- 
perity, and  that  is  what  reclamation  means.  We  are  making  homes  for  our 
children,  and  in  order  that  their  children  may  live  on  in  the  future.  Hence,  if 
we  spend  money  in  order  to  do  this  work,  and  if.  in  order  to  spend  the  money. 
we  must  mortgage  the  future,  we  are  doing  it  in  behalf  of  future  generations. 

I  do  not  believe  there  is  anything  more  I  wish  to  say. 

Mr.  HAYDKX.  The  committee  is  always  glad  to  have  the  benefit,  of  your  views. 
Your  previous  statement  in  behalf  of  the  Smith-McNary  bill  was  very  helpful. 
The  support  that  has  been  given  to  the  entire  problem  of  the  reclamation  of 
waste  land  in  the  United  States  by  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  is 
sincerely  appreciated  by  this  committee  and  by  everyone  interested  in  that 
great  question. 

(The  report  submitted  by  Mr.  Wallace  is  as  follows:) 

"  Your  committee,  after  carefully  considering  the  matter  submitted  to  it, 
beg  leave  to  render  the  following  report: 

"  We  feel  that,  while  the  present  dislocation  exists  throughout  the  world, 
with  industry  stagnant  and  unemployment  and  its  attendant  suffering  grow- 
ing worse  each  day,  it  behooves  us,  in  the  name  of  humanity  and  of  our 
country,  to  work  out  a  constructive  program  that  will,  in  addition  to  al- 
leviating the  existing  situation  to  a  large  extent,  establish  those  works  that 
will  ever  redound  to  the  dignity  and  progress  of  our  Government  and  the 
welfare  of  our  people. 

"We  have  carefully  analyzed  the  need  and  opportunity  for  real,  necessary 
constructive  works,  and  have  considered  what  we  think  are  of  the  most  im- 
portance, in  housing,  reclamation,  and  water  transportation  and  power  con- 
struction. 

"We  have  generalized  this  entire  matter  under  three  captions,  name'y  :  Re- 
clamation of  the  desert  contiguous  to  the  great  Colorado  River  system  and 
including  other  worthy  reclamation  projects  in  other  parts  of  the  country : 
development  of  the  plan  to  connect  the  Great  Lakes  with  the  St.  Lawn-nee 
for  deep-water  shipping;  and  the  fullest  development  of  the  Mississippi  sys- 
tem in  its  entirety. 

"  In  the  general  reclamation  of  the  Colorado  and  other  similar  though 
smaller  projects,  we  have  in  mind  the  inclusion  of  reclamation  plans  in  general. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  199 

"  THE     COLORADO. 

"The  possibilities  of  the  Colorado  system  challenge  adequate  description. 
Immense  tracts  of  land,  the  richest  in  the  world,  can  throughout  this  valley, 
and  the  desert,  he  brought  under  a  high  state  of  cultivation  which  will 
necessitate  towns  and  cit:es,  manufacturing  and  railroads.  as>  the  development 
continues. 

"The  reclamation  of  desert  and  swamp,  the  building  of  good  roads  and 
canals  and  adequate  housing  plans  might  well  absorb  our  attention  and 
energies  in  thesv  crucial  times.  That  nation  that  can  build,  while  other  na- 
tions decay,  is  the  nation  that  will  endure. 

"All  general  plans  of  reclamation  of  swamp,  arid  and  cut-over  lands  might 
generally  be  classed  with  this  enterprise.  The  price  of  one  dreadnaught  would 
go  a  long  way  toward  financing  one  of  these  enterprises.  It  has  been,  esti- 
mated that  the  value  of  the  land  reclaimed  under  the  Mississippi  projec> 
would  triple  the  cost  of  construction. 

"  THE  MISSISSIPPI. 

''(me  of  the  ideas  that  has  come  under  discussion  for  many  years,  is  the  full- 
est development  of  the  water  system  of  the  Mississippi  and  its  principal  tribu- 
taries. Most  of  the  activities  of  local  politicians  in  the  years  gone  by  have  been 
in  the  direction  of  the  "  i>ork  barrel"  method,  trying  to  improve  some  locality 
or  creek,  in  a  temporary  manner,  when  it  was  often  really  tributary  to  a  larger 
system. 

"  The  development  of  the  Mississippi  system  in  its  entirety  would  automat- 
ically do  many  things,  beside  making  seaports  of  some  of  our  inland  cities. 
With  the  enterprise  under  way,  building  from  the  headwaters  of  the  Missouri, 
the  Ohio,  and  the  Illinois  Rivers  down  to  New  Orleans,  it  would  create  an  out- 
let by  water  for  the  produce  of  St.  Louis,  Chicago.  Kansas  City.  Pittsburgh,  and 
other  localities  directly  to  Mexico,  either  coast  of  South  America,  or  to  the 
world. 

"This  would  also  he  true  of  imports.  The  leveeing  of  this  wonderful  water 
system  would  automatically  do  many  other  things.  It  would  prevent  the 
periodical  disastrous  floods,  it  would  reclaim  millions  of  acres  of  rich  laud,  and 
do  away  with  disease.  It  would  require  many  years  to  construct  This  work 
properly,  and  in  the  meantime  while  the  rest  of  the  world  is  writhing  in  trou- 
ble and  uncertainty,  this  gigantic  enterprise  would  stimulate  to  its  best  form 
every  line  of  human  endeavor  in  our  country,  our  unemployed  would  be  put  at 
useful  and  profitable  work,  it  would  require  clothing,  housing,  food,  and  pay 
rolls,  steel,  concrete,  and  machinery,  and  in  the  meantime  the  public  would 
have  something  healthier  to  think  about  other  than  the  "open  shop"  fights  or 
the  beating  down  of  labor,  and  all  other  values. 

"  \Ve  are  well  equipped  to  embark  on  such  an  enterprise.  The  idea  of  a  canal 
connecting  the  Atlantic  with  the  Pacific  Ocean,  across  the  Isthmus  baffled  the 
world.  Annies  of  men  died  like  flies  in  the  effort  of  France  to  build  the  canal. 
We  did  it  and  did  it  so  well  that  before  it  was  completed,  hundreds  of  tourists 
and  sightseers  were  gong  to  the  Canal  Zone  for  their  health. 

"  We  believe  that  the  general  conference  should  authorize  the  drafting  and 
the  introduction  of  three  separate  bills,  one  dealing  with  the  Mississippi  project, 
one  with  the  St.  Lawrence  project,  and  a  general  reclamation  bill  to  deal  with 
the  great  Colorado  project  in  the  entirety,  and  similar  smaller  plans  as  they 
exist  in  the  various  parts  of  our  country. 

"These  are  necessary  and  worthy  enterprises  at  all  times,  and  will  redound 
to  the  comfort  and  profit  of  all  generations  to  come.  It  is  especially  proper 
that  the  people  at  large  should  lend  every  effort  to  inaugurate  at  least  one  of 
these  projects  at  the  earliest  possible  moment,  and  thus  bring  industry  and 
progress  hack  into  our  national  life." 

STATEMENT    OF    MB.    THOMAS    C.    YAGER,    ATTORNEY    FOR 
COACHELLA  VALLEY  COUNTY  WATER  DISTRICT.       • 

Mr.  YAGEU.  Mr.  Chairman.  I  appear  here  in  behalf  of  the  Coachella  Valley 
County  Water  District.  That  organization  covers  most  of  the  territory  of  the 
Coachella  Valley.  We  have  approximately  K'.s.ooo  acres  of  irrigable  land,  or 
land  that  is  susceptible  of  irrigation  by  gravity  flow  from  the  Colorado  Hivei. 
We  are  interested  in  this  project,  not  entirely  from  the  satndpoint  of  the 


200  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

development  of  our  new  area,  hut  we  are  interested  in  it  from  the  standpoint 
both  of  irrigation  and  protection.  Most  of  our  valley  is  below  sea  level.  The 
town  of  Indio  is  '22  feet  below  sea  level,  and  gravity  flow  into  the  district 
would  extend  a  short  distance  north.  The  Salton  Sea.  which  ran  into  the 
valley  in  1905,  covers  a  jxirtion  of  the  Coachella  Valley,  and  if  it  were  not 
stopped,  it  would  have  covered  all  of  it.  Therefore,  we  are  interested  in  this 
project  from  the  standpoint  of  protection,  and  vitally  so.  We  are  also  inter- 
ested in  it  from  the  standpoint  of  development  in  the  Southwest.  Four  years 
ago  we  were  here  pleading  with  this  committee  and  with  Congress  for  legisla- 
tion which  would  permit  of  the  development  of  this  territory,  and.  in  your 
wisdom,  you  saw  lit  to  pass  a  bill  asking  for  a  further  investigation. 

Those  investigations  have  been  made  and  the  re]K>rts  submitted  to  this  Con- 
gress by  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  recommending  the  construction  of  this 
project.  It  has  been  indorsed  by  Secretary  Hoover,  after  he  had  familiarized 
himself  with  the  project  through  all  the  hearings,  held  in  the  West  by  the 
Colorado  River  Commission.  It  has  been  indorsed  by  the  engineers  of  the 
Reclamation  Service,  and  it  has  been  indorsed  by  many  competent  engineers 
of  the  West.  We  believe  in  the  possibility  and  the  feasibility  of  this  project, 
and  I  am  instructed  by  the  Coachella  Valley  County  Water  District  as  its  repre- 
sentative to  give  to  you  our  unqualified  indorsement  of  the  Swing  bill,  11.  U. 
11449.  This  development,  gentlemen,  is  the  life  of  our  valley.  We  are  prac- 
tically at  the  limit  of  our  present  water  supply.  The  irrigated  area  'that  we 
now  have  is  irrigated  from  artesian  wells.  We  have  approximately  10,000  acres 
under  cultivation,  and  our  supply  is  about  at  its  limit.  We  are  using  about 
the  limit  of  the  water  supply  at  the  present  time,  and  if  we  intend  to  go 
ahead  in  that  valley,  we  must  look  to  other  sources  for  water,  and  this  is  the 
only  source  we  can  look  to.  Therefore,  we  ask  you  to  pass  this  legislation. 
AV'e  need  it  for  protection  and  we  need  it  for  development. 

We  have  no  disposition  or  desire  to  interfere  with  any  of  the  rights  of  the 
upper  States,  nor  do  we  believe  that  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  Canyon 
Dam  will  interfere  with  any  rights  of  the  upper  States.  Over  17,000.000  acre- 
feet  of  water  are  passing  the  Yuma  project  yearly  that  is  going  to  waste,  and 
that  water  could  be  placed  upon  the  arid  lands  of  the  West,  making  an  agri- 
cultural empire.  It  would  not  interfere  at  all  with  development  in  the  upper 
States,  as  all  agree  there  is  sufficient  water  for  every  acre  in  the  watershed. 
It  would  supply  power,  and,  by  the  way.  this  power  is  a  by-product  of  the  de- 
velopment. We  need  that  power  to  help  pay  for  the  construction.  It  is  a 
part  of  the  development,  and  this  territory  is  not  entering  into  this  project  with 
the  idea  of  being  a  competitor  of  any  power  company,  but  it  is  an  asset  that 
Hows  from  this  development. 

Mr.  SMITH.  How  many  acres  are  under  irrigation  in  the  Coachella  Valley? 

.Mr.  YAGER.  Approximately  10,000  acres. 

Mr.  SMITH.  How  many  additional  acres  could  be  placed  under  irrigation  by 
this  proposed  project? 

Mr.  YAGER.  There  are  approximately  138,000  acres  susceptible  of  irrigation 
from  gravity  How  of  the  Colorado  River. 

Mr.  SMITH.  At  what  price  could  the  agricultural  industry  there  take  ad- 
vantage of  this  opportunity  for  additional  water,  or  what  price  per  acre  could 
they  afford  to  pay? 

Mr.  YAGER.  Mr.  Hayden  has  made  the  statement  that  that  land  is  reasonably 
worth  $200  per  acre.  I  think  we  can  go  further  that  that.  We  raise  a  class 
of  crops  there  that  are  very  valuable,  such  as  dates,  grapes,  etc.  There  is 
really  no  price  that  we  can  place  on  an  acre  of  dates.  There  is  no  competition 
in  the  United  States  to  the  production  of  dates,  and  enormous  returns  can  be 
made. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  My  statement  was  that  every  acre  of  irrigated  land  in  the 
lower  Colorado  Valley  was  worth  at  least  $200. 

Mr.  YAGER.  I  think  we  can  absolutely  concur  in  that,  although  in  this  par- 
ticular locality  the  land  is  probably  worth  a  good  deal  more.  The  grape  crops 
there  are  the 'first  on  the  markets.  They  receive  from  $500  to  $1,000  per  acre 
from  grapes  yearly. 

Mr.  SMITH.  Is  the  additional  land  to  be  irrigated  in  the  public  domain  or  in 
private  ownership? 

Mr.  YAGER.  A  portion  of  the  land  in  the  Coachella  Valley  is  in  the  public 
domain,  and  a  portion  of  it  is  in  private  ownership. 

Mr.  SMITH.  How  was  that  land  in  private  ownership  acquired?  They  could 
not  take  it  up  under  the  homestead  law,  could  they?  How  was  title  acquired 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  201 

to  the  land  that  was  in  the  public  domain?  I  am  referring  to  the  land  that  is 
now  under  irrigation. 

Mr.  YAGER.  The  public  land  in  that  vicinity  has  been  withdrawn  from  entry, 
but  prior  to  its  withdrawal,  it  was  taken  up  by  homesteaders  and  tinder  the 
desert  land  law.  water  from  wells,  or  underground  water  being  used  for  its 
reclamation. 

Mr.  SMITH.  The  district  only  includes  the  lands  there  in  private  ownership? 

Mr.  YAGER.  It  includes  practically  the  entire  valley  at  the  present  time. 

The  people  of  the  Southwest  are  a  unit  in  their  desire  to  have  this  project 
constructed,  and  have  shown  their  good  faith  and  sincerity  by  contributing 
heavily  to  the  cost  of  the  report  and  investigations,  submitted  to  you  by  the 
Secretary  of  the  Interior  in  order  that  your  committee  and  this  Congress  might 
have  full  and  complete  information  upon  which  you  could  base  intelligent  legis- 
lation, providing  for  the  development  of  this  great  national  resource. 

We  further  appeal  to  you  and  submit  that  it  is  the  proper  duty  and  function 
of  this  Government  to  help  its  citizens  in  this  case  as  it  has  in  others  and  to 
relieve  them  from  the  constant  flood  menace  that  threatens  their  destruction 
when  they  themselves  have  spent  millions  of  dollars  and  exhausted  every  re- 
source in  their  efforts  to  control  the  floods  of  this  river,  and  failing  now  look 
to  you  for  help. 

In  1905-6  the  Colorado  River  broke  its  banks  and  ran  rampant  through 
tl'.e  cultivated  area  of  the  Imperial  Valley,  inundating  that  vast  stretch  of 
land  now  lying  in  the  Imperial  and  Coachella  Valleys  and  doing  millions  of 
dollars  of  damage,  and  formed  what  is  now  called  the  Salton  Sea.  Just  recently 
the  Colorado  River  broke  through  the  levees  of  the  Palo  Verde  Valley,  River- 
side County.  Calif.,  and  has  again  done  millions  of  dollars  of  destruction  and 
damage  to  the  cultivated  area  in  this  district,  although  this  district  has  built 
numerous  levees  and  is  to-day  carrying  a  heavy  bonded  indebtedness  for  moneys 
it  has  spent  to  protect  itself  from  the  ravages  of  this  river.  Other  districts  along 
the  lower  reaches  of  the  Colorado  River  have  been  seriously  damaged  and  have 
si  tent  large  sums  of  money  in  their  efforts  to  protect  their  lands  from  floods, 
but  all  these  expenditures  have  been  made  at  different  points  along  the  river 
in  the  construction  of  dikes  and  levees ;  draining  the  pocketbooks  of  the  farmers 
in  this  vic'nity  and  yet  they  have  not  gone  to  the  heart  of  the  problem  and 
permanently  protected  themselves. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Interior  under  your  direction  and  the  direction  of  Con- 
gress here  presents  to  you  a  solution  of  the  problem',  which  has  received  the 
indorsement  of  some  of  the  most  competent  engineers  of  the  West. 

The  construction  of  this  project  as  provided  in  this  report,  in  addition  to  the 
desilting  and  equating  the  flow  of  the  river  and  protecting  this  property  from 
damage,  provides  an  adequate  and  practical  water  supply  and  irrigation  canal 
for  the  irrigation  of  approximately  a  million  acres  of  land  within  the  United 
States  and  this  land,  one  of  the  most  productive  areas  the  United  States  has; 
and.  gentlemen,  here  let  me  emphasize  again  the  fact  that  very  little,  if  any.  of 
the  produce  and  crops  that  will  be  grown  on  this  acreage  will  come  in  competi- 
tion with  crops  grown  in  any  other  part  of  the  United  States.  On  account  of 
the  early  season  and  extreme  heat,  the  grapes,  cantaloupe,  onions,  lettuce  and 
all  such  crops  are  harvest  CM!,  sold,  and  used  before  the  crops  of  other  localities 
are  mature.  This  produce  to  a  large  extent  is  shipped  East  to  supply  the  eastern 
demand  and  upon  a  bare  market  and  the  money  received  from  the  sale  of  this 
produce  is  spent  with  your  eastern  manufacturer  in  buying  farm  implements 
and  machinery,  dry  goods,  automobiles,  and  general  merchandise,  nearly  all  of 
which  is  manufactured  on  the  eastern  coast  or  at  least  east  of  the  Mississippi 
River.  This  development  thus  is  of  great  benefit  to  the  eastern  manufacturer, 
merchant,  railroads,  and  other  business  branches. 

oiiu-r  witnesses  have  told  you  of  the  demand  for  power  in  the  Southwest  and 
the  value  of  the  power  to  be  developed  by  the  construction  of  the  Boulder  I>am 
and  that  the  power  is  of  sufficient  volume  and  value  to  bear  the  entire  cost  of 
the  dam.  affording  primarily  flood  protection  and  the  equating  of  the  river  for 
irrigation. 

We  thus  present  to  you  a  problem  that  will  solve  itself  if  you  will  provide  the 
legislative  machinery  and  start  it  in  motion. 

Private  power  companies  have  fded  upon  the  river  and  have  offered  to  build 
such  a  dam  for  the  power  alone,  showing  their  faith  in  the  financial  and  engi- 
neering soundness  of  the  project,  but,  gentlemen,  that  river  is  a  great  national 
asset,  belonging  to  the  people  of  this  country,  over  which  this  Congress  has  juris- 
diction, and  this  Government  is  the  only  agency  that  can  properly  allocate  the 


202      DEVELOPMENT  OF  LOWER  COLORADO  RIVER  BASIN. 

benefits  to  be  derived  in  its  development  and  is  the  only  agency  in  which  the 
people  of  the  Southwest  are  willing  to  entrust  this  undertaking. 

I  can  do  no  more  than  assure  you  gentlemen  that  the  people*  whom  I  here 
represent  are  desirous  and  anxious  that  this  project  he  built  and  that  they  urge 
you  to  pass  this  legislation,  the  soundness  and  feasibility  of  which  have  been 
passed  upon  by  competent  engineers. 

Mr.  HAYUEN.  As  this  is  the  concluding  hearing  of  the  committee  on  this  bill 
until  after  the  recess  of  the  House.  I  ask  permission  to  insert  in  the  record 
two  letters  that  I  have  received  from  the  Director  of  the  United  States  Geologi- 
cal Survey,  and  a  telegram  from  the  State  water  commissioner  of  Arizona  with 
reference  to  the  proposed  investigation  by  representatives  of  the  State  of 
Arizona,  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service,  and  the  Geological  Survey  of 
the  irrigation  possibilities  in  my  State  from  the  waters  of  the  Colorado  River. 
Mr.  George  H.  Maxwell,  who  appeared  before  this  committee  not  long  ago. 
has  conceived  the  idea  that  there  might  possibly  be  irrigated  from  the  Colorado 
Kiver  as  much  as  two  and  a  half  million  acres  of  land  in  Arizona.  Of  course, 
an  engineering  investigation  will  be  required  to  determine  just  what  can  be 
done.  In  a  letter  to  me  sometime  ago  lie  stated: 

"I  have  an  engineer  now  at  work  on  plans  and  estimates  of  cost  of  the 
Arizona  cut-off  and  the  Arizona  Highline  Canal,  and  you  will  be  surprised  when 
I  am  able  to  send  you  a  statement  of  the  results  of  his  calculations.  They  will 
demonstrate  beyond  question  that  the  cost  of  this  work  will  be  more  than 
covered  by  the  additional  power  developed,  leaving  only  the  cost  of  the  com- 
paratively inexpensive  distribution  systems  below  the  divide  to  be  borne  by  the 
lands  reclaimed  with  water  brought  through  the  Arizona  Highline  Canal." 

(The  letters  and  telegrams  submitted  by  Mr.  Hayden  are  as  follows:) 

DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR, 

UNITED  STATES  GEOLOGICAL  STKVEY, 

\Vnxliiniitoii.    Mill/    /N,    _/.'>.?.'. 
Hon.  CARL  HAYDKX, 

House  of  Representatives, 

MY  DEAR  MR.  HAYDEN  :  With  reference  to  your  interview  on  May  1(5  with 
Mr.  P.  S.  Smith  and  Mr.  G rover  relative  to  the  suggested  survey  of  a  higli- 
line  canal  from  the  proposed  Boulder  Canyon  reservoir  to  lands  in  the  Gila 
River  Valley : 

It  is  believed  that  a  survey  of  a  single  canal  line,  which  would  be  very 
expensive,  might  not  lead  to  a  conclusion  in  regard  to  the  feasibility  of  watering 
all  or  a  considerable  part  of  the  lands  suggested  for  irrigation,  because  of  the 
possibility  of  alternate  routes  some  one  or  more  of  which  might  be  cheaper  and 
better.  I  believe  that  it  would  be  better  to  make  topographic  surveys  of  critical 
areas;  such,  for  example,  as  the  upper  end  of  the  proposed  canal  line  where 
the  topography  will  probably  be  found  to  be  very  difficult  for  canal  location 
and  construction,  the  region  where  the  crossing  of  the  Williams  River  would 
have  to  be  made,  and  the  divide  between  Bouse  Valley  and  the  Harqua  Hala 
Desert.  Such  surveys  would  yield  informaion  which  might  lead  to  a  definite 
decision  as  to  the  feasibility  of  the  project  and  at  the  same  time  give  informa- 
tion which  would  be  of  value  in  connection  with  other  projects. 
Yours  very  cordially, 

GEO.  OTIS  SMITH,  Director. 

DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  INTERIOR. 
UNITED  STATES  GEOLOGICAL  STRVEY, 

\\'<ix}riti</toti.  .linn-  .'T,   /.').?.>. 
Hon.  CARL  HAYDEN, 

Hotise  of  Representatives. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  HAYDEN  :  In  reply  to  your  telephonic  inquiry  relative  to  recon- 
naissance of  lands  irrigable  from  Colorado  River  in  western  Arizona  : 

Arrangements  have  been  made  for  an  investigation  to  be  made  during  this 
field  season  by  three  engineers  to  be  detailed  from  the  office  of  the  State  water 
commissioner,  the  Reclamation  Service,  and  the  Geologival  Survey.  Mr.  F-.  C. 
La  Rue  will  represent  the  Geological  Survey,  but  I  am  not  advised  that  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  other  two  organizations  have  yet  been  designated.  It  is  ex- 
pected that  these  engineers  will  determine  the  location  and  approximate  area 
of  lands  which  may  be  irrigated  economically  either  by  gravity  diversion  or 
pumping  from  Colorado  River. 
Yours  very  cordially, 

GEO.  OTIS  SMITH,  Director. 


DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIIST.  203 

PHOENIX,  ARIZ.,  June  28,  J!>.>.!. 
Hon  CARL  HAYDEN. 

House  of  J'eitrcxcntatircx.  WaxJiiiififtD).  I).  C.: 

Arrangements  practically  made  with  Reclamation  Service  and  Geological  Sur- 
vey for  an  engineer  from  each  department  with  our  engineer  to  head  a  party 
to  investigate  and  determine  all  possible  irrigable  lands  in  Arizona  from  Colo- 
rado River.  Arizona  has  about  $18.000  for  the  purpose,  which  is  insufficient 
for  complete  detail  work. 

W.  S.  NORVIEL, 
State  Water 


Mr.  HAYDEN.  If  these  representatives  of  the  two  bureaus  of  the  Interior  De- 
partment and  the  State  of  Arizona  make  this  proposed  engineering  investiga- 
tion at  an  early  date.  I  am  sure  that  much  valuable  information  will  be  ob- 
tained which  I  hope  will  ultimately  result  in  the  reclamation  of  considerable 
areas  of  land  in  'Arizona  which  have  heretofore  been  deemed  worthless  for 
agriculture. 

Furthermore,  I  would  like  to  direct  the  attention  of  the  committee  to  the 
fact  that  there  are  three  areas  of  land  in  the  Colorado  River  Valley  in  Arizona 
that  have  long  been  recognized  as  susceptible  of  irrigation.  The  first  is  Mo- 
have  Valley  above  Needles,  comprising  about  27,000  acres.  The  second  includes 
over  100,000  acres  in  the  Colorado  River  Indian  Reservation  near  Parker,  and 
the  Third  consists  of  about  IN.  (XXI  acres  in  the  <  'ibola  Valley. 

Much  data  has  been  published  by  the  Government  relative  to  irrigation  in 
the  Imperial  Valley.  There  are  also  accessible  a  number  of  Government  pub- 
lications containing  detailed  information  regarding  the  Yiuna  project,  but  little 
or  nothing  has  been  printed  with  respect  to  the  irrigation  possibiltes  of  any 
of  the  three  projects  I  have  just  mentioned.  I  have  here  a  report  prepared  by 
C.  A.  Engel,  an  engineer  of  the  Indian  Service.  His  report  was  prepared  at 
an  expense  of  over  $100,000,  about  half  of  which  came  from  the  proceeds  of 
the  sale  of  lots  in  the  town  of  Parker.  I  ask  to  have  this  report  printed  as 
an  appendix  to  these  hearings,  omitting  therefrom  most  of  the  maps,  drawings, 
and  photographs. 

Mr.  SMITH.  Is  Mr.  Engel  an  official  of  the  Government? 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  Yes:  he  is  an  engineer  of  the  United  States  Indian  Service. 
He  has  made  a  full  and  detailed  engineering  report  covering  a  gravity  irriga- 
tion project  on  the  Colorado  River  Indian  Reservation.  I  also  have  here  an 
irrigation  report  on  the  Fort  Mohave  Indian  Reservation.  I  shall  boil  it  down 
so  as  to  make  it  as  brief  as  possible,  and  will  omit  all  the  photographs.  I 
likewise  have  some  information  relative  to  the  Cibola  Valley.  I  ask  unanimous 
consent  to  have  all  the  data  that  I  have  mentioned  printed  as  an  appendix 
to  the  present  hearings. 

Mr.  SMITH.  I  am  under  the  impression  that  we  are  limited  as  to  the  amount 
of  money  we  can  spend  for  such  a  purpose,  and  we  will  put  the  request  in  this 
way,  that  if  the  appropriation  of  the  committee  is  sufficient  we  will  have  it 
printed. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  think  it  would  be  especially  interesting  to  know  what  lands 
can  be  developed  in  both  California  and  Arizona  by  the  average  flow,  and  how 
much  could  be  developed  by  waters  stored  in  a  reservoir.  I  think  this  would  be 
Interesting  information. 

Mr.  SMITH.  I  think  it  would  be  very  valuable  as  a  supplement  to  the  report 
we  have  already  had  printed. 

Mr.  HAYDEN.  There  is  no  doubt  about  the  authority  of  the  committee  to  have 
this  data  printed. 

Mr.  SMITH.  If  we  have  sufficient  appropriation  for  the  purpose,  the  clerk  will 
please  send  it  to  the  Printing  Office  to  lie  printed  in  the  manner  indicated  by 
Mr.  Hayden. 

STATEMENT   OF  MB.   ELMER  W.   HEALD,   REPRESENTING   THE 
AMERICAN  LEGION  OF  THE  STATE  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

Mr.  HKALD.  I  desire  to  state  very  briefly  that  the  American  Legion  of  the 
State  of  California,  and.  also  the  National  American  Legion,  are  in  favor  of 
the  Swing  bill.  We  desire  to  see  this  legislation  passed,  because  it  will  make 
possible  the  reclamation  of  about  4iV2.00M  acres  of  Government  lands  which  can 
be  made  available  for  soldier  settlement.  This  bill  in  that  respect  is  directly 
in  line  with  the  policy  of  the  Federal  Government,  because  in  I'.tl!)  the  United 


204  DEVELOPMENT    OF   LOWER   COLOEADO    RIVER   BASIX. 

Suites  Government  appropriated  $110,000  for  the  purpose  of  making  a  survey 
of  all  Government  land  to  find  possible  locations  for  soldier-settlement  schemes. 
This  money  was  turned  over  to  the  United  States  Reclamation  Service,  and 
was  used  by  them  in  making  this  survey.  That  survey  showed  that  the  largest 
contiguous  body  of  Federal  land  still  unentered  was  in  the  lower  Colorado 
River  Basin.  This  will  make  possible  soldier  settlement  for  a  large  number 
of  ex-service  men. 

This  bill  provides  preferential  settlement  rights  for  ex-service  men,  in  direct 
line  with  the  policy  of  the  United  States  Government,  as  set  forth  in  the 
reclamation  act  and  as  recommended  by  Secretary  Fall.  I  want  to  submit  for 
the  record  some  resolutions  indorsing  the  Swing  bill.  There  is  one  other  reason 
why  the  American  Legion  is  vitally  interested  in  the  Swing  bill :  You  probably 
know  that  the  only  successful  soldier-settlement  plan  in  operation  today  is 
in  the  Imperial  Valley.  This  plan  was  put  into  operation  entirely  by  the 
American  Legion,  and  we  have  there  now  about  200  ex-service  men.  Judge 
Swing  showed  me  a  clipping  from  a  paper  showing  that  a  large  number  of  ex- 
service  men,  who  are  now  receiving  vocational  training,  are  making  application 
for  land  under  their  scheme  now  in  operation  in  the  Imperial  Valley.  I  will 
tell  you  briefly  what  that  scheme  is  under  which  the  American  Legion  is  help- 
ing ex-service  men  to  procure  farms :  The  ex-service  men  who  are  receiving 
vocational  training  under  the  Veterans'  Welfare  Bureau  locate  on  a  piece  of 
land,  and  they  do  not  have  to  pay  anything  for  three  years.  The  owner  of 
the  land  is  protected,  because  it  is  obligatory  upon  the  trainees  to  plant  crops 
of  a  permanent  character  and  the  land  is  in  this  way  greatly  benefited  and 
improved.  After  three  years  he  starts  to  paying  on  the  purchase  price. 

Mr.  SMITH.  Does  he  pay  interest  during  the  first  three  years? 

Mr.  HEALD.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  BARBOUR.  What  is  the  rate  of  interest? 

Mr.  HEALD.  The  rate  of  interest  is  all  the  way  from  5*  to  7  per  cent.  At 
the  end  of  three  years  he  starts  to  paying  on  the  purchase  price. 

The  legion  works  out  a  budget  for  the  man  in  which  a  certain  per  cent  of  the 
receipts  obtained  from  crops  grown  on  the  land  is  paid  to  the  land  owner  on 
the  purchase  price ;  practically  all  over  and  above  the  cost  of  operating  the 
farm  is  paid  over  to  the  land  owner  on  he  purchase  price.  He  has  30  years  in 
which  to  purchase  the  land. 

These  men  are  interested  in  the  Swing  bill  for  two  reasons:  First,  it  is  hard 
for  them  to  get  credit  at  the  present  time,  as  has  been  explained  here  time 
and  time  again  by  members  of  the  southern  California  delegation,  and  testi- 
fied to  before  the  committee,  that  it  is  impossible  to  borrow  money  because  of 
the  flood  situation,  and  bankers  are  refusing  to  loan  money  any  longer  except 
at  a  very  exorbitant  rate  of  interest.  Consequently,  these  men  are  desirous  of 
seeing  that  condition  changed  so  that  they  can  secure  loans  on  their  farms. 

At  the  hearings  in  1919  before  this  committee  the  farm  loan  bank,  through 
Mr.  Joyce,  made  a  statement  that  they  could  not  lend  any  money  in  the  Im- 
perial Valley  because  of  the  flood  situation,  the  insecurity  of  the  Imperial 
Valley  made  it  impossible  for  the  farm  loan  banks  to  let  out  any  money ;  it  was 
too  great  a  risk. 

Mr.  SWING.  And  because  their  water  system  was  in  Mexico. 

Mr.  HEALD.  And  because  their  water  system  was  in  Mexico.  I  have  a  letter 
here  which  Mr.  Joyce  wrote  to  Mr.  B.  D.  Irvine,  in  which  he  makes  the  state- 
ment that  if  this  legislation  is  passed  it  will  solve  the  financial  problem  of  the 
Imperial  Valley,  so  far  as  the  Federal  loan  bank  is  concerned,  and  I  want  to 
submit  this  to  be  included  in  the  record  also. 

Mr.  SWING.  I  ask  also  that  this  resolution  be  made  a  part  of  the  testimony. 

Mr.  SMITH.  If  there  is  no  objection,  that  will  be  done. 

(The  letter  and  resolution  referred  to  are  as  follows:) 

TREASURY  DEPARTMENT. 

Wailiinr/ton,   May  16,   1M2. 
Mr.  B.  D.  IRVINE. 

DEAR  SIR:  Pursuant  to  our  conversation  to-day.  I  desire  to  assure  you  I 
am  heartily  in  favor  of  S.  3fftl,  the  bill  recently  introduced  by  Senator  Johnson, 
of  California. 

If  enacted  into  a  law.  the  provision  of  this  bill  will,  in  my  opinion,  solve 
the  major  problems  of  the  Imperial  Valley,  which  are  to  my  mind  the  ques- 
tions of  adequate,  dependable  water  supply  and  the  flood  menace. 

It  goes  without  saying,  that  when  these  two  problems  are  solved,  general 
credit  individually  and  collectively  would  be  enhanced.  In  my  opinion,  the 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  205 

enhancement  of  this  credit  will  tend  to  lower  interest  rates,  and  to  render 
the  financing  of  district  improvements,  such  as  drainage,  etc.,  comparatively 
easy,  and  under  more  favorable  conditions  than  have  prevailed  in  the  past. 

As  you  are  aware,  I  am  somewhat  acquainted  with  the  general  conditions 
of  the  Imperial  Valley,  and  I  should  be  glad  indeed  to  render  any  assistance 
of  which  I  am  capable  in  promoting  its  welfare  and  future  development.  You 
are  at  liberty  to  call  upon  me  any  time  I  can  be  of  assistance  in  advancing 
the  interests  of  Imperial  Valley. 
Yours  very  truly, 

W.  H.  JOYCE, 
Member   Farm  Loan  Board. 

The  following  resolution  was  adopted  by  the  Imperial  County  Interpost 
Council,  American  Legion,  Department  of  California,  in  special  session  as- 
sembled at  El  Centro,  Calif.,  December  10,  1921,  to  be  presented  to  Secretary 
Fall  at  conference  called  by  him  in  San  Diego,  December  12,  1921 : 

We  recommend : 

(1)  The  immediate  construction  by  the  Government  of  the  Boulder  Canyon 
Dam  and  the  ail-American  canal  at  Government  expense  and  same  to  remain 
under  Government  control. 

(2)  That  the  Government  supervise  the  distribution  of  all  power  rights  and 
privileges. 

(3)  That  ex-service  men  and  women  of  the  Nation  be  given  a  preferential 
filing  right  to  all  arid  or  agricultural  land  under  this  project  for  a  period  of 
at  least  90  days. 

(4)  Owing  to  the  fertility  of  the  land  within  this  project  and  the  consequent 
intrinsic  value  thereof  when  properly  reclaimed  from  their  desert  state,  that 
disposition  of  such  lands  be  made  in  areas  of  an  average  of  40  acres  to  one 
applicant  or  entryman. 

(5)  That  filings  on  these  lands  shall  be  nonassignable  for  a  period  of  at 
least  12  months  from  date  of  entry. 

(6)  that    such    applications    to   enter    as    now    exist    and    which    have    not 
been  allowed,  upon   lands  heretofore  withdrawn,  or  which  may  hereafter  be 
withdrawn  from  entry  by  the  Government  Tinder  this  project  be  canceled. 

(7)  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  be  empowered  to  cooperate  and  con- 
tract with  such  authorized  State  agencies  as  may  be  in  position  to  assist  in 
the  reclamation  and  irrigation  of  public  arid  lands  and  to  dispose  of  portions 
of  such  public  lands  to  such  State  agencies,  conditioned  upon  their  assisting 
ex-service  men  and  women  in  the  reclamation  thereof  in  tracts — not  exceeding 
an  average  of  40  acres  to  any  one  person. 


BRAWLEY,  CALIF.,  June  20,  1922. 
ELMER  W.  HEAD, 

Congress  Hall,  Washington,  D.  C.: 

Executive  committee  approved  proposition ;  will  wire  indorsement,  sending 
resolutions  to  all  posts;  State  organization  of  auxiliary  also  indorsed;  details  of 
meeting  in  letter  following. 

C.  E.  NICE. 


RESOLUTION  NO.    12,   OF  THE  AMERICAN   T.ECION.   DEPARTMENT  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

Whereas  the  American  Legion,  Department  of  California,  has  heretofore 
in  its  conventions  assembled  indorsed  and  recommended  the  construction 
of  storage  and  diversion  works  in  the  lower  Colorado  River  for  the  purpose  of 
reclaiming  lands  to  be  available  for  settlement  by  veterans;  and 

Whereas  it  appears  that  financial  assistance  from  the  Federal  Government  for 
this  purpose  can  not  be  obtained  within  a  reasonable  period  of  time;  and 

Whereas  it  appears  that  approximately  three  hundred  thousand  acres  of 
valuable  Government  land  in  Imperial,  Coachella  and  adjoining  valleys  can  be 
reclaimed  by  the  construction  of  what  is  known  as  Boulder  Creek  Dam,  the 
raising  La  gun  a  Dam  approximately  15  feet,  and  proper  system  of  diversion  ; 
and 

1316— 22— PT  4 2 


206  DEVELOPMENT   OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER   BASIN. 

Whereas  it  appears  that  such  works  when  constructed  will  provide  facilities 
for  the  development  of  electric  power  .sufficient  to  pay  the  whole  cost  thereof: 
Now.  therefore,  be  it 

by  the  American  Legion,  Department  of  California,  in  convention 
That  we  go  on  record  as  favoring  the  construction  of  Boulder  Creek 
Dam  in  the  Colorado  River,  the  raising  of  Laguna  Dam  and  the  construction 
of  proper  means  of  diversion  under  such  contacts  and  agreements  with  private 
corporate  interests  as  will  make  available  the  waters  for  reclamation  of  said 
lands  without  cost  to  the  lands,  except  possibly  for  diversion,  and  conditioned 
upon  said  Government  lands  being  made  available  for  veteran  settlement :  and 
we  further  recommend  the  granting  of  fifty  thousand  acres  of  said  lands  without 
cost  to  the  veterans'  welfare  board  of  this  State,  for  land  settlement  under  the 
provisions  of  the  State  law,  in  the  event  said  board  shall  make  application  for 
the  same. 

We  direct  that  copies  of  this  resolution  be  properly  authenticated  and  for- 
warded to  the  proper  authorities  from  which  permission  or  concession  must  be 
obtained  to  carry  out  the  objects  proposed. 

Mr.  HEALD.  The  second  reason  why  ex-service  men  are  interested  in  this 
hill  is  because  it  provides  for  flood  control  and  protection  and  sets  forth  a 
unified,  comprehensive  plan  for  the  development  of  the  Colorado  River  by  the 
United  States  Government.  The  Swing  bill,  if  enacted  into  law.  will  provide 
water  for  452,000  acres  of  very  rich  land  available  for  ex-service  men,  which 
land  now,  without  W7ater,  is  worthless.  I  would  also  like  to  have  it  appear  in 
the  record  that  the  citizens  of  Imperial  Valley  have  been  represented  here  as  a 
unit  by  three  delegates.  I  make  that  statement  because  it  was  stated  by 
Senator  Phipps  that  the  citizens  of  Imperial  Valley  as  a  unit  have  not  been 
represented  before  this  committee.  I  represent  not  only  the  American  Legion, 
but  also  the  people  of  Imperial  Valley. 

Mr.  B  ARBOUR.  You  reside  in  the  valley? 

Mr.  HEALD.  I  reside  in  the  valley  and  have  resided  there  since  my  discharge 
from  the  United  States  Army. 

Mr.   BABBOUK.  At  what  place? 

Mr.  HEALD.  Calipatria. 

Mr.  SWING.  It  has  been  stated  recently  that  100,000  ex-service  men  have  ap- 
plied to  the  Government,  to  Secretary  Fall,  for  opportunities  to  secure  farm 
homes.  Is  that  true? 

Mr.  HEALD.  Yes;  that  is  true,  and  I  would  like  to  have  this  Included  in  the 
record,  also  a  statement  in  an  Associated  Press  report,  quoting  Secertary  Fall 
on  the  number  of  applications  to  the  Interior  Department  for  homes  by  ex-service 
men. 

(The  statement  referred  to  is  as  follows:) 

"FLOODS  OF  OTHEB  INQUIRIES — SECRETARY  GIVES  FIGURES  DISCLOSING  NATION- 
WIDE HUNGER  OF  EX-SERVICE  MEN  TO  GET  BACK  ON  FARMS. 
[By  the  Associated  Press.] 

"Evidence  of  the  desire  of  former  service  men  to  go  back  to  the  farm  is  con- 
stantly reaching  the  Interior  Department,  Secretary  Fall  announced  yesterday, 
adding  that  more  than  100,000  such  applications  have  been  received  for  employ- 
ment in  development  of  land. 

"In  addition,  inquiries  concerning  available  land  are  coming  in  by  the  hun- 
dreds of  thousands,  the  Secretary  continued. 

"  '  The  correspondence  is  largely  Irom  farm-trained  men  who  are  not  appealing 
for  a  gratuity,'  he  said,  '  but  are  seeking  an  opportunity  to  acquire  a  home  in 
the  land  by  utilizing  their  labor  and  experience.' 

"  ARE  EXPERIENCED  MEN. 

"  '  It  is  significant  that  the  bulk  of  these  inquiries  generally  come  from  States 
wherein  prices  of  agricultural  land  have  reached  such  heights  that  opportuni- 
ties for  men  with  small  capital  to  acquire  a  home  are  extremely  limited. 

"  'Among  these  States  Illinois  ranks  first  with  18.600  inquiries  and  applica- 
tions for  land.  Farm  land  prices  in  this  State  average  among  the  highest  in  the 
Union.' 


DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN.  207 

"  COME  FKOM  EAST  AND  WEST. 

"  '  Conditions  are  much  the  same  in  Indiana,  Ohio,  Iowa,  Missouri,  Kansas, 
and  Nebraska,  where  land  hunger  on  the  part  of  the  war  veterans  is  shown  by 
45,620  inquiries  received.  Of  these,  26,900  made  application  for  work  in  order  to 
secure  a  home. 

"  '  The  arid  and  semiarid  States  show  up  with  a  total  of  61,340  former  service 
men  interested  in  home  making  on  the  land.  The  Southern  States  are  repre- 
sented by  27,780  and  the  Eastern  States,  including  Pennsylvania,  by  25,900.  In 
the  Northern  States  of  Michigan.  Wisconsin,  Minnesota,  and  the  Dakotas  there 
are  14,460  veterans  who  have  indicated  a  desire  to  obtain  a  farm  home.' 

"OFFERED  ONLY  490  FARMS. 

"  The  Reclamation  Service,  Secretary  Fall  said,  during  the  past  two  years  has 
been  able  to  offer  former  soldiers  only  490  farms,  although  50,000  inquiries  were 
received  and  7,480  former  service  men  formally  applied  for  farms. 

"  In  none  of  these  cases,  he  added,  could  the  Government  offer  financial  assist- 
ance, and  the  successful  applicants  were  required  to  put  up  from  $3.50  to  $5  an 
acre  and  an  annual  charge  of  upward  of  $1  an  acre." 

Mr.  Swrxo.  Mr.  Raege  of  the  national  legislative  bureau  of  the  American 
Legion  started  from  his  office  to  be  here  to  testify  in  behalf  of  this  bill,  but 
something  has  happened  and  he  has  not  arrived. 

Mr.  HEALD.  I  would  like  to  have  permission  to  get  a  written  statement  from 
Mr.  Raege  and  file  it  with  my  statement. 

Mr.  SMITH.  If  there  is  no  objection  you  may  do  so. 

( The  statement  referred  to  is  as  follows : ) 

Mr.  ELMER  W.  HEALD, 

American  Legion,  Department  of  California,  Washington,  D.  C. 

DEAR  MR.  HEALD:  In  compliance  with  your  request  I  am  submitting  the  fol- 
lowing statement  on  behalf  of  the  national  headquarters  of  the  American  Legion. 

I  am  John  Thomas  Taylor,  vice  chairman  of  the  national  legislative  committee 
of  the  American  Legion,  with  offices  at  530-536  Woodward  Building,  Washing- 
ton, D.  C.  The  national  organization  urges  favorable  consideration  of  H.  R. 
11449,  a  bill  to  authorize  the  erection  of  a  dam  across  the  Colorado  River  for 
the  purpose  of  irrigating  what  is  called  the  Imperial  Valley  in  the  southern 
part  of  California  and  lands  in  Arizona. 

At  the  last  department  convention  of  the  American  Legion  the  following  reso- 
lution was  unanimously  adopted  : 

"  Whereas  the  American  Legion,  department  of  California,  has  heretofore 
in  its  conventions  assembled  indorsed  and  recommended  the  construction  of 
storage  and  diversion  works  in  the  lower  Colorado  River  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
claiming lands  to  be  available  for  settlement  by  veterans;  and 

"  Whereas,  it  appears  that  financial  assistance  from  the  Federal  Government 
for  this  purpose  can  not  be  obtained  within  a  reasonable  period  of  time;  and 

"Whereas,  it  appears  that  approximately  three  hundred  thousand  acres  of 
valuable  Government  land  in  Imperial,  Coachella,  and  adjoining  valleys  can  be 
reclaimed  by  the  construction  of  what  is  known  as  Boulder  Creek  Dam,  the  rais- 
ing of  Laguna  Dam  approximately  fifteen  feet,  and  proper  system  of  diversion : 
and 

"  Whereas,  it  appears  that,  such  works  when  constructed  will  provide  facili- 
ties for  the  development  of  electric  power  sufficient  to  pay  the  whole  cost 
thereof:  Now,  therefore,  be  it 

"  Resolved  by  the  American  Legion,  Department  of  California,,  in  convention 
assembled.  That  we  go  on  record  as  favoring  the  construction  of  Boulder  Creek 
Dam  in  the  Colorado  River,  the  raising  of  Laguna  Dam,  and  the  construction  of 
proper  means  of  diversion  under  such  contracts  and  agreements  with  private 
corporate  interests  as  will  make  available  the  waters  for  reclamation  of  said 
lands  without  cost  to  the  lands,  except  possibly  for  diversion,  and  conditioned 
upon  said  Government  lands  being  made  available  for  veteran  settlement:  and 
we  further  recommend  the  granting  of  fifty  thousand  acres  of  said  lands 
without  cost  to  the  Veteran's  Welfare  Board  of  this  State,  for  land  settlement 
under  the  provisions  of  the  State  law,  in  the  event  said  board  shall  make  ap- 
plication for  the  same. 


208  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER  COLORADO   RIVER  BASIN. 

"  We  direct  that  copies  of  this  resolution  he  properly  authenticated  and  for- 
warded to  the  proper  authorities  from  which  permission  or  concession  must  be 
obtained  to  carry  out  the  objects  proposed." 

At  the  tirst  national  convention  of  the  American  Legion,  held  at  Minne- 
apolis, Minn.,  on  November  11,  1919,  it  was  resolved  that  the  American  Legion 
urge  that — 

"  1.  Reclamation  of  unproductive  lands  by  direct  Government  operation  for 
settlement  by  service  men  and  women ; 

"  2.  That  the  administration  of  the  same  be  decentralized  : 
"  3.  That  no  heavy  financial  restrictions  be  imposed ;  and  further, 
"  4.  That  the  right  of  eminent  domain  be  incorporated  to  prevent  speculation." 
The  American  Legion,  therefore,  urges  that  the  Committee  on  Irrigation  of 
Arid  Lands,  having  received  favorable  reports  upon  this  project  from  both 
the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  report  this  bill 
favorably  to  the  House  with  the  end  in  view  that  eventually  ex-service  men 
and   women   may   have   an   opportunity   to   settle  upon    this   vast   acreage  in 
southern  California  which  has  been  so  aptly  described  as  the  "  Garden  spot 
of  the  West." 

(Thereupon,  at  11.45  o'clock  a.  m.,  the  committee  adjourned  to  meet  again 
at  the  call  of  the  chairman.) 


INDEX. 


PARTS  1,  2,  3,  AND  4. 

Bacon,  Mr.  John  L..  mayor  of  San  Diego,  Calif. : 

League  of  California  Municipalities 73 

Changes  in  Colorado  River  bed 75 

Cost  of  maintaining  levees 77 

American  and  Mexican  interests 79 

Sundry  resolutions 81 

Crisswell,  Mr.  Ralph,  president  city  council,  Los  Angeles,  Calif. : 

Hydroelectric  power 100 

City  will  take  all  power  left  after  other  cities  have  been  supplied 101 

Power  should  be  allocated  by  the  Government 103 

Carr,  Mr.  W.  J.,  Representative  of  Pasadena,  Calif. : 

Price  of  power 114 

Government  control  of  power 116 

Durand,  Prof.  \V.  P..  Stanford  University,  California : 

Financial  reimbursement 63 

Power  shortage 64 

Demand  for  power ; 67 

Conserving  the  oil  supply 68 

Government  the  only  agent  to  develop  power 69 

Oil  supply  of  the  United  States 70 

Davis,  Hon.  Arthur  P.,  Director  of  the  Reclamation  Service : 

Report  on  problems  of  the  Imperial  Valley 20 

Drainage  basin  of  the  Colorado  River 21 

Boulder  Canyon  and  other  reservoirs 23 

Cost  of  Boulder  Canyon  Dam 29 

Power  receipts  will  pay  for  the  dam 30 

Reservoir  will  control  the  hazard  of  the  river 32 

Additional  irrigation  area 34 

Decision  of  United  States  Supreme  Court,  Wyoming  v.  Colorado 36 

Evans,  Mr.  S.  C..  mayor  of  Riverside,  Calif. : 

Flood  conditions  Palo  Verd  Valley 110 

Reimbursing  the  Government 112 

Cooperation  and  use  of  power 114 

Hoover,  Hon.  Herbert  C.,  Secretary  of  Commerce: 

The  Colorado  River  Commission 52 

Development  of  power 55 

Agriculture  given  priority 56 

Immediate  need  of  power 59 

The  Government  will  recover  the  money  invested 61 

Heald,  Mr.  Elmer,  representative  California  American  Legion : 

Attitude  of  the  American  Legion 203 

H.  R.  11449  carries  preference  right  for  veterans 204 

World  War  veterans  seeking  land 206 

Resolutions  American  Legion,  Department  of  California 207 

Hoodenpyl,  Mr.  George,  city  attorney,  Long  Beach,  Calif. : 

Boulder  Canyon  Dam  necessary  to  protect  Imperial  Valley 105 

Federal  Government  should  not  make  profit  from  power 107 

Allocation  of  water  rights  and  power 109 

Nicholson,  Hon.  Samuel  D. :  United  States  Senator  from  Colorado : 

Protecting  Colorado's  rights 195 

Denver's  water  supply 196 

209 


210  DEVELOPMENT  OF   LOWER   COLOEADO   RIVER  BASIX. 

Nickerson,  Mr.  J.  S.,  president  Imperial  Valley  Irrigation  Board :  Page. 

Valley  statistics 123 

Irrigation  costs  in  valley  and  Mexico 123 

Water  shortage 126 

Want  of  flood  protection  destroys  credit 127 

Money  spent  in  Mexico 132 

Comparison  of  costs 139 

Sundry  agreements 140 

Emergency  conditions 154 

Phipps,  Hon.  Lawrence  C.,  United  States  Senator  for  Colorado : 

Colorado  River  Commission 191 

Hydroelectric  power 192 

Competition 193 

Denver's  interest 193 

Other  dams  and  reservoirs 194 

Swing,  Hon.  Phil  D.,  Member  of  Congress,  eleventh  California  district : 

H.  R.  11449 1 

Report  of  Secretary  of  the  Interior 4 

Difficulty  of  operating  across  international  boundary 7 

Menace  to  Imperial  Valley 10 

Boulder  Canyon  Dam  and  Reservoir 15 

Investigation  of  the  project  by  the  Government 19 

Discussion  of  general  conditions 20 

Silver,   Mr.   Gray,  Washington   representative   American   Farm   Bureau 
Federation : 

Electricity  on  the  farm 121 

Applied  to  moving  trains 122 

Vaile.  Hon.  William  N..  Member  of  Congress  first  Colorado  district : 

Compact  between  States 197 

Appropriation  of  water  to  beneficial  use 197 

Watson,  Mr.  Edgar,  legislative   representative  American  Federation   of 
Labor,  "  The  Colorado." 

Walker,  Dr.  W.  H.,  president  California  Farm  Bureau  Federation: 

Protection  from  overflow 117 

Competition  in  production 119 

Yager,  Mr.  Thomas  C.,  attorney  for  Coachella  Valley  Water  I'srrs    Asso- 
ciation : 

Protection   from  floods 199 

Development  of  additional  areas 200 

Southern  California  a  unit  for  H.  R.  11499 201 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


RFC'D 


A     000099011     9 


